Its hard to tell from the pictures but the squared rim has me thinking that this could be a proof that was released in into circulation.
I knew I would get this reaction. Remember I noted "hard to tell from the pictures" and used the word could. What do you see that makes you feel so strongly against? I am not defending my suggestion that this could be a proof rather I'm asking for your insight.
Since you've (iirc) expressed an interest in varieties, use this opportunity to take a close look at the mintmark. Perhaps it's nothing - I'm using an iPhone here - but I cannot help but to think it's worth the effort. Even if an artifact of the photo you can consider it a learning experience. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, right?
Got 4 rolls of BU 59's AND 59D's roll collecting at a local bank. Somebody turned in hand wrapped rolls of them for some reason.
A shiny coin does not necessarily have "luster". You can polish a coin to "shine it up" but that is not the same as luster. Maybe this definition from Heritage will explain better than I can: Lustre The brightness of a coin that results from the way in which it reflects light. Many different types of lustre exist, and one of the trickiest parts of the grading process is determining whether the lustre of a coin is artificial (see whizzed), natural as made, or diminished through wear, friction, cleaning, or other factors.
your def is good, but heritage's makes it synonymous with shine, in a general sense, since shine could be genuine or artificial from cleaning
