Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="900fine, post: 218395, member: 6036"]"Could" is the operative word. VAM ID "could" determine... or not. If the same die was used to make proof and busines strikes, they would have similar characteristics, and one could be fooled into thinking a circ was a proof. So the question remains... if a coin is sitting in front of you, exactly what criteria uniquely and categorically ID it as a proof ? I'm tempted to say "Proofs sure are purty...I know 'em when I see 'em." I'm hoping there's something better than that. I think it's tougher on the older 19th century stuff, especially if toned. Sometimes experts disagree, so there's some subtlety. Maybe this has something to do with characteristics of the fields, devices, and strike.  Since they are special polished dies and planchets, proof fields have much smoother texture when viewed under a 16x loupe; uncirc Business strikes tend to have more the "orange peel" effect. But that's not good enough; I've seen some P/L Morgans with very smooth surfaces, but they weren't proofs. I'm thinkin' there's still more to it. I'm eager to hear from the old hands on this one ![/QUOTE]