There wasn't much literature on finger prints. How do you determine if fingerprints on a coin are truly PMD?
No such thing as a stupid question, we all have to start some place. OK fingerprints are not a good thing to have on a coin. Must likely happened in circulation.
Not stupid at all. Your questions shows you are thinking. All fingerprints are PMD or Post Mint Damage and that's not good.
A better definition would be PSD or Post-Strike Damage since it can't be determined if the fingerprint occurred before or after the coin left the Mint. In either case, it is still damage because the oils of the skin will etch into the surface of the coin. Chris
All fingerprints are considered to be PMD, even if the fingerprint is on a proof coin in a sealed mint package. If the fingerprint is new enough, it may be removable with a soak in pure acetone (like you can buy at a hardware store).
Fingerprints are only pmd if they have been on long enough to not be able to be removed with acetone and start etching into the surface so you guys are correct but only giving half the story
Yeah, but you know how some people can be if you don't spell everything out completely. When was the last time you heard someone use the term "post-minting damage"? Using the term "post-strike damage" avoids the chance of misinterpretation. Chris
I use PMD, which seems to be the more common usage. Others use PSD, which is probably more "accurate" technically. Probably doesn't matter for most audiences, as most collectors understand and accept both. It's damage either way.