Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Insider, post: 3186730, member: 24314&quot;]I posted this on another forum and it caused quite a stir about the correct terminology.</p><p><br /></p><p>First, minor error or not, at least one maj0or TPGS would mention this on the label because if some folks received a coin with a ripped up surface and missing design they would not like it!&nbsp;&nbsp; Others would be glad to &quot;cherry&quot; this minor error if not mentioned on the label.</p><p><br /></p><p>Second, this is a lamination.&nbsp; Part of the surface is ripped up with cracks across both sides in the leaves.&nbsp; The &quot;trick&quot; part is the fact that part of the lamination is missing.&nbsp; It has become detached and is no longer on the coin.&nbsp; The dull hole in the field is where it was and the part that was covered by the original split.&nbsp; Most numismatists call the missing area a &quot;detached&quot; lamination.&nbsp; This image shows both detached and attached.&nbsp; &quot;Partially Detached Lamination&quot; works for me.&nbsp; <b> I don&#039;t use the word &quot;delaminated&quot; as the metal of the coin is homogeneous and <span style="color: #b30000">not layered</span> (laminated) as a clad coin would be.</b>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in