| Author |
Replies: 18 / Views: 3,467 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Looks like a PSD that affected the fields. That is different. Fields frosted, bust a rear design is shiny. I wonder how they polish the die now? Maybe re-laser the fields? The program is computer generated.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75094 Posts |
That's Post Strike Damage on the reverse. Your coin is also in a later die state as well.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
 with BigSilver.
In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020 In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020 In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75094 Posts |
Remember. If it's incuse, than it's most likely Post Strike Damage.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
492 Posts |
Got it and thanks. But I see it a bit differently with all due respect. PSD on a proof directly from the mint is in my mind a clear error. I shall keep it in that regard. I like it and no one loses. Best Rich
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
492 Posts |
Ok I put this coin under a microscope at high mag, through the plastic, and the upper end is not incuse. It definitely protrudes. I cannot tell about the rest but it may also be protruding out. Just an update for the fans. I'll try for a better pic but am not enthusiastic unless I remove it from the casing. Rich
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
If it is raised, could be a die chip or die gouge?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4692 Posts |
Sort of reminds me of PL Franklins with fiber stuck to the die, leaving squiggly marks on the coin. A possibility?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It could be grease on the coin?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
492 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75094 Posts |
Looks like damage to me.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
492 Posts |
Hi E and V. Yeah just hard to tell if it is a strike damage or post. Again since the mint prides itself on error free coins, it is interesting that this one would be sold to a mint investor without some type of QA. Maybe it happens a lot. Tks
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75094 Posts |
It's weird. The coins sometimes get damaged when they get packaged into the mint sets.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It may come off. But you would have to take it out. With the new images it reminds me of wax?
|
|
New Member
United States
28 Posts |
I received ten sets, two of which had damaged coins. One had scratches on the rim of the dime, and the other had scratches on the rim of the dollar, with some kind of smudging on the field area just inside of the part of the rim with the scratches. If one of those coins was a quarter, I could have just swapped lenses and returned one set; instead, both were returned, and I'm hoping they send replacements rather than a refund.
Ironically (or tragically), I then discovered that these lenses can be opened and re-closed without harm. Had I discovered this one day sooner, I could simply have swapped dimes (or dollars) and only needed to return one set. A day late and a dollar short. :(
BTW, for anyone needing to return coins to the Mint, instead of using the "handy" return form on the invoice packed with the coins, CALL the Mint to arrange the return. While you are on the phone with them, ask them to cover the return shipping fee. They will then send you a label -- you can request either snail-mail receipt of a physical label, or, email receipt of a link to a UPS page from which you can print your own label, or, display a barcode on your phone while at the UPS store.
It is important that YOU bring this up, as THEY will NOT volunteer this information!
If you use the form packed with the coins, you will need to pay your own freight, and, you will be subject to a seven-day return period (from your receipt of the coins). When we did it by phone, however, it was eight or nine days after receipt, and they never even asked when we received them. All they wanted was the order number, our name and address, and so forth.
One last thing (uber-tangential, but, possibly of merit): I read that these things are numbered. At first, I could not see anything, but I eventually found numbers that looked like they were hot-stamped (or possibly just pressure stamped) into the black plastic carrier inside each lens.
The numbers on mine were quite low. The highest was something like 107 or thereabouts, and IIRC the lowest was 9. I had a few that were in the 10-15 range, one in the 20s, and one in the 30s (or 50s? I forget! I should probably go through them all and log the numbers.)
I don't know if these numbers indicate the actual "off the press" sequence or not. The person who discovered this had numbers that were all above 100. We placed our order the very instant they opened for business, via the website. (My wife was poised at her laptop, and I was on the phone. She got in immediately, and I got a busy signal.)
Likewise, I don't know if low numbers will increase the value (assuming the do indicated the minting sequence), but it can't hurt to know about this, n'est-ce pas?
Edited by Howard Black 08/19/2018 7:39 pm
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 3,467 |
Page 2 of 2
|