| Author |
 Replies: 51 / Views: 7,034 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
997 Posts |
Proofs originally were made to prove the dies, to check for proper weight and appearance. These were seen as better than regular circulation coinage due to being the first strike off the dies, before additional wear caused less attractive striking.
Now they are nothing of the type, but specially struck with special dies and presses, even at different mints. They have lost the purpose of proving the dies and become a money cow for the mint.
I don't have an issue with the mints selling them but they are not true Proofs and for a circulation collector like me I have no affinity for them. They are certainly good looking coins but not my cup of tea.
It should also be noted that I have properly spelled Proof each time this post, a first for me!
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188740 Posts |
From a historical sense, you are correct.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
819 Posts |
yes I am working on a 30 year block of proof sets I only need two the 1950-51. dont know what it is just like the way they look.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
997 Posts |
Quote:
From a historical sense, you are correct. Of course I am, aren't I always?  |
|
Moderator
United States
188740 Posts |
More often than not, which is the best most of us can expect to be. |
|
Valued Member
United States
449 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
374 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
374 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
374 Posts |
So, now, I am addicted to proofs.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Here is the 50 cent coin in the 2016 Business strike and proof sets, What's NOT to like about the proof coin ?  |
|
Moderator
United States
188740 Posts |
That is a nice looking pair, Trout.  |
|
Valued Member
United States
245 Posts |
I get a proof set and mint set from the US mint every year and then I break the coins out to go into my Dansco albums as I collect all the coins in these sets. I also buy the Proof and MS grade modern commemoratives released from the mint every year as I have a full set of those in Proof and Mint State.
I recently started buying proof sets from 1964 back to 1950 and I currently have from 1964 back to 1954. The 4 from 1953 to 1950 are pretty pricy and it will be a while before I buy those.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4932 Posts |
I have loads of proofs, you wouldn't believe it.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
Proof coins are of great interest to me, provided they were not intended to be marketed to the collector.
That, for me, means proofs before about 1960, in standard metals.
That means I only have a very few proofs that fit the requirement. They are almost always very rare, and thus almost always far too expensive for me to buy.
These early proofs do not have the spectacular presentation that modern proofs do, but they are nevertheless the best examples of what the Mint can achieve for the particular issue of the time. They were struck to provide the standard of minting that was to be aimed for.
These coins are of little value if their condition is significantly less than perfect FDC (Fleur De Coin), unless they are struck off metal.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
595 Posts |
I am divided on proofs. New proof sets, since about 1990, I am not so interested in because they seem to be just making a bunch of versions of the same coins. However, older proof sets I love. I have most sets between 1936 and 1990 and completing this sequence is one of my collecting goals. Nothing beats the proof coins from the 1800s. Unfortunately, they are expensive. I am about half-way through a proof set (minus gold) for 1883. It is a neat year because there are 3 different nickels, a 3 cent coin, and the Trade dollar. I almost bought a proof 1883 half at a show a couple weeks ago, but decided against it because it looked over dipped. |
| |
Replies: 51 / Views: 7,034 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 11/10/2015 5:34 pm
