I'm a Daniel Carr fan, I have several of his signed strikes. It started with the signed state quarters he did and has extended to the Moonlight Mint strikes he has done with a refurbished Denver Mint Press. My favorite is struck on a quarter blank he found while working on the press.
I don't collect Carr's works. They don't interest me that much. The same goes for modern Mint issues. In the grand scheme of things, my personal preferences don't mean squat. Others enjoy them immensely -- and don't care and neither should care what I think of them. But I agree that the flaming over Carr's offerings is overdone to total absurdity. And too much of it is not aimed at the works themselves -- but is targeted at the supporters and critics themselves, complete with smart-mouthed pontification and nit-picking over words. I can guarantee you that some of the remarks made in the sem-anonymity of the Internet, if addressed to me to my face, would result in a forcible closing of a mouth and a pair of handcuffs for me. In short, would some of you DARE to speak to someone else like that in person? Or are you a slow learner with several bridges in your mouth to show for it? Off my chest.
Hmm, I always thought a softer metal would be more conducive to a full free flow into a design. Maybe the mint was thinking minimalist economics?
Keep in mind the full bands are a small delicate feature and with the softness of the 24K gold they might not be able to show the sharp detail the fine bands require. I'm not defending the mint, I think that with the laser technology they now use, they could have come up with something, He** I'm still mad they charged so much over melt for the coin to start with, and when are they going to release the 6,000 ones they still have?
These are a few of the Daniel Carr metals I have. The one in the upper left slab is the coin struck on a quarter blank he found in the Denver refurbished press.
Exactly. The mint has the technology to reproduce the coin as it was originally produced, but someone was either cutting corners, or didn't notice the detail of the original design. Either way.......foul.
It is my opinion that the reason the US Mint gold dimes don't have "full bands" is because they were not included in the original sculpt for the coin. So from the master hubs all the way down to the struck coins, they do not have full bands. That detail simply isn't in the dies. So the question is, why were full bands not part of the sculpt ? That I do not know. Gold is a strange metal to strike, actually. It is soft, of course, compared to most other metals. But even soft metals don't really "flow". "Metal flow" is a term that has been around numismatics for a long time. But I think it is not really an accurate term. Metal doesn't really "flow" so much as it bends. Striking a coin results in small areas of metal bending to fill the dies. But with sufficient striking force, I believe it would be possible to produce fully split bands on a 1/10-troy-oz gold piece. I may try over-striking some US Mint gold dimes at some point. No specific plans as of yet.
Why do some Franklin Halves not have "Full Bell Line"? It's the quality of the strike. Same with the Mercury Dime- good strike=full bands.
Point is, if they weren't on the original dies, how did they get on the coins.........artisans cutting design after the fact?
I think they were hand engraved into the hubs back then so they were on the og merc dies and this time around they opted not to do that and blamed it on technology. If I'm wrong I'm sure dan will correct
This I've heard, but why not employ computer technology to exemplify the resulting coin in its' original state? It can be done.........
So let me get this straight, the Mercury Dime I have with "Full Bands, and the Franklin Half I have with "Full Bell Lines"":, and The Jefferson Nickel with "Full Steps" had either the hub or dies hand engraved instead of the hubs having them from the start?
Cus the mint doesn't care? Have we seen a gold one with FSB yet? If not they were never designed to have it