No S proof 1990?

The nice shine got my hopes, I set it next to the obvious phili mint to compare.
,,TACH=full]847759[/ATTACH]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sorry. That's not a proof.

 

That's a normal business strike Cent.
Minted at the Philadelphia Mint.

 

We've been through this. This is what a great example looks like.
It would have to come from a proof set, been cracked open and spent. In order for you to find it in circulation. Possible, but unlikely.
I forget what the mintage was 400? Less? Someone knows.

 

Business strike...not a proof.

 

Wow.

 

That sounded sincere.

 

I simply cannot wrap my brain around how much lack of understanding that's out there about what a proof coin is and is not. THAT is numismatics' FIRST prerequisite skill, isn't it?

 

I couldn't get past how OP thought his coin was "shiny"
much less a worn "Proof" shiny

 

I would say no. Proper grading and not messing with coins should be their first skills. Proof versus non-proof is not the easiest skill, especially for earlier proofs. Impaired proofs have to be studied before proving if it is or is not a proof. Its little things like angles of rims, etc. A good business strike from fresh dies can give even experienced collectors pause if wondering about if it is an impaired, (circulated) proof.

Yes, it is easier today with sandblasted fields, etc, just speaking in generalities. I found an impaired 1968 cent once in circulation, and it took me a while to prove to myself it was indeed a proof and not a well struck business strike.

We need to remember 99.9999% of the world does not have 30+ years coin collecting experience. Even most people who call themselves "coin collectors" simply accumulate state quarters, etc. They come here with honest questions given their level of knowledge. We can choose to honestly answer them or not.

 

Shinny is the proper spelling.

 

Exactly. I accumulated for 50 years and am now learning to be a collector.

 

That should at least be part of the Coins 101 curriculum. What shouldn't be in the curriculum is errors.

 

Unfortunately, that's not the way YouTube $$ draws in "collectors".

 

And we welcome you here sir. If your avatar means you are a Vietnam Vet, thank you for your service sir. I am a Gulf War vet, but I am well aware yours was a real war versus ours.

 

Amen, brother!

 

Am I the only collector whose very first coins were a proof set?

 

Yes. Thanks. You got shot at so it counts. Peace bro!

 

Yes, probably.
lol

 

Maybe not the only, but I collected coins for about 15 years before ever owning a proof set. Even then, it was a gift, not something I wanted. Specialty coins only made to be collected have never held much attraction to me. I have always collected coins made for general commerce, finding them more interesting.

That is why we all can collect coins, different coins for different collectors. Proof coins to me have always reminded me of mint with mint tags beanie babies, something not meant to be touched, and therefor not much fun. I understand this is just me though. If you love proof coins, you are still a coin collector and therefore my brother (or sister).