No S proof 1990?

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by Walter Marx, Nov 19, 2018.

  1. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    My first nexus to coins was from an employee of my dad's, who was a committed small business entrepreneur, before it was used as a political wedge status. 1956, in his case. In 1963, he hired a guy who was waaaaay into coins, and introduced my old man to proof sets. Dad ordered 5 1963 sets and he and the other guy carefully mounted one set into a Capital Plastics 5-hole holder, because the pliofilm actually hid most of the beauty of proofs. Dad gave it to me and I was hooked. I have NEVER missed buying the standard proof set since, even when I was "taking a break" from coins in my past. Proof coins (regular set) is THE one constant in my collecting life.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Greg Walbert

    Greg Walbert New Member

    Growing up I saw uncirculated coins as the most precious and proof coins as the most perfect representation of the coin. I still add to my collection every year even though my interests and I understanding of coin collecting has grown significantly. All of my proof sets from 67 back to the early 50s are certified.
     
  4. Spark1951

    Spark1951 Accomplishment, not Activity Supporter

    The important thing is...you answered the call to arms. @capthank @medoraman ...and all vets and those currently serving: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE!

    I am a Vietnam Era, Gulf Storm and Iraqi Freedom Veteran and I will never forget how shabbily vets were treated back in the mid-70's...Spark
     
    capthank and furryfrog02 like this.
  5. Spark1951

    Spark1951 Accomplishment, not Activity Supporter

    ...And we roll back around to when one becomes a numismatist and not just a accumulator or collector. I learned very quickly in the early 60's the difference between proof and mint state, so I share your dismay.

    I accumulated coins for 50+ years, collected/inherited many during those years and am now attempting to add to the body of knowledge of numismatism.

    My first "skill" was identifying older designs of all denominations (US). Simultaneously I started applying Red Book grading criteria to the mercs, buffalos, franklins and walkers I was getting from circulation...Spark
     
  6. CoinCorgi

    CoinCorgi Derp, derp, derp!

    First things I learned were mint marks, composition then design changes 20th century US Coins. The friggin Red Book and Coin World Newspaper were immediate purchases once I started getting an interest in coins.
     
  7. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Now apparently it’s the YouTube app on a cheap Android phone with a 5 generations old version of Android on it.
     
  8. capthank

    capthank Well-Known Member

    Well every morning when I check Coin Talk over a cup of coffee, I invariably get my proof sets and uncirulated sets out to determine if I have something scarce. On the cents I can not determine large and small through the packaging but will one day open them up for closer scrutiny.
     
  9. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Wait to study more. There is NO large vs. small thing that cannot be seen through the packaging, ... none.
     
  10. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    Those are crazy looking, if one was in circulation for almost 30 years would is keep that tone ? Not doubting
    Those are crazy looking . Would one keep that tone if for whatever reason spent almost 30 in normal circulation? Not doubting you, just curious.
     
  11. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    It would show wear, but it would still be identifiable as a proof from certain markers.
    Squared rims, strong details, partially mirrored fields.
    The common circulated business strikes show none of these features.
     
  12. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Too many apparently have NO IDEA what a mirrored field is. When you bring it up to your eye, you can see your eye looking back at you. That’s what mirrored means. Nothing at all like the OP.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page