I know this picture could be better, but my question is basic and I hope the picture will suffice as part of my question. I bought some proof Lincolns yesterday and the 57 looks different than the others. Is this because of the strike? It just seems the 57 detail is not as fine and crisp as the other more recent coins. I love this 57, but just trying to learn about these stikes and all.
Different composition of metals. Different die making process. The 1957 Has a higher relief with a multiple hubbing process. The 2001-S cent is a single hub process with lower relief and more detail. I prefer the old process better. The depth of luster is much better on the older proofs and last long than the newer ones. Also the cameo affect just ruins it for searching for varieties. So give the the old process.
The proof coins take much better images than the BU business strikes. They just seem to smile for the camera when compared side to side.
One the 57 is a brilliant proof while the 2001 is a frosted proof. Two the master hub had been in use for many years by 1957 and a lot of the fine detail is missing. The master die continued to wear and lose detail until it was redone in 1969. Eventually in later years they began redoing the master hubs every year so the details are much sharper even though the releif is lower.
