1883 Morgan Dollar Proof Details? Rim Looks Square

That picture that paralyse used to show the "lines". That's a picture of MY COIN.

I took that picture. The color has been dialed up.Whatever they say was used to take that picture is false. The people that originally commented on the image incorrectly attributed it to being done by some special camera.

It wasn't a special camera...

I used a flat-bed scanner to get the image. (I think) I used 1200 dpi. I scanned the whole coin. Both sides. Then I cropped it into manageable sizes. This was about 20 years ago.

It's funny to me, as that picture (there were several more) was the evidence I used to prove my coin was a class 3 branch mint proof, to which they all denied.

Then, to find out 20 years later, an image of my coin is being used to show the evidence of a proof strike, it makes my heart go patter-pit.

The coin is still in my possession. It has never had a holder. Still looks good. I won't submit it because I don't trust doing so, because of little situations like these.

Even funnier, it's an 1881-O, I was blackballed by the online coin community for gloating about my coin online, submitting that exact image and others, citing several instances that document an 1881-O proof existed, providing evidence that contradicted the experts, and pointing it out like a jerk (I'll admit it, as I felt attacked and they were kind of being jerks themselves), before I brought it to Long Beach.

Where the guy at the table held the line up looking at my coin, while another guy guided me to the 1879 Branch Mint Proofs Exhibit (that were authorized). I returned to the guy at the table still looking at the coin and seemingly, reluctantly, gave me my coin back. He muttered something as I disregarded his comment immediately, as I knew (and he knew) it was not the truth (and not what I wanted to hear).

I know I'll never get an absurd amount of money for the coin. I'm not in the club. It will never be submitted via the mail to be graded as I feel that's too risky. It's a shame though, because the coin, when in your hand, is one of the most beautiful coins, regardless, that I believe you'll ever see. Across-the-room reflectivity. If you shine a light into it, it reflects the coins design on the wall... like the bat signal.

There's another picture I took (no scanner used)... that has the perfect reflection of a pink flower in the reverse, as I held it next to a bouquet. I always liked that one.

to the Community, GodlessWanderer!

Well GodlessWanderer, the ball is in your court. Care to comment ?

You can see that circumferential line that separates the base of the denticles from the rim clearly.

Mind you, me, everyone... these pictures were taken in 2011. The cameras on phones have improved quite a bit since then. I think they still hold up for an under 300kb file.

Let's see what today's camera phones can do. I'll take a similar photo of the "pink flower" one I did to show it's reflective properties... don't hold your breath.

Maybe a picture with words in the distance... hmmm.

Here's another image. What could have caused the indentations on the denticles?

Multiple strikes?

Metal displacement between the denticles?

Regardless, I know that my coin was struck with the intent of being as proof-like as possible, due to the uncharacteristically un-business struck characteristics it exhibits, both via online images that I have provided, but even moreso when "in hand".

It has "across-the-room" reflectivity.

Easiest way to resolve this issue would be to submit the coin to PCGS, NGC or ANACS for certification and verification. Reaching out to John Roberts directly at ANACS would also be a good start, as he's one of the foremost numismatic experts on Morgan dollars and their varieties. You could also reach out to Roger Burdette at CoinWeek as well.

Do some reading on the Roe/Bolender coin for further information about one of the great Morgan mysteries (the supposed 1881-O branch mint proof which has never been rediscovered.)

Dies don't need to be "fresh" to have prooflike surfaces, by the way. PL Morgans exist that were clearly struck from repolished dies, including those struck after a process called "basining" the dies where the metal was moved inwards (away from the rims) as a result of polishing which resulted in more concavity and can make the rims appear deeper/sharper than usual.

Sometimes the Mint workers would get overzealous and polish the dies TOO much leading to missing parts of the design (missing hair, missing feathers, etc.) creating, e.g. the "overpolished dies" VAM 16 that Unimpossible linked above. The 1878 Morgans from both mints also have numerous examples of overpolished dies.