| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 1,639 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
196 Posts |
The only way I could tell it was a proof is at certain angles  |
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
The edge of the rim on the cent is way too clean to be a business strike. The edges are too even I just noticed in one of these pictures how evenly it was struck  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4618 Posts |
The last set of images show more of the mirrored fields that I would expect. I'm not sure what type of exposure is at play here, but I think both the haze and the beginning of the darker toning on the cent show that the cent has been environmentally damaged somewhat. I know your question was about the streaks and not about certification, but if the coins were of an extremely rare variety, I would think that one of the conservation services would be in order. As this isn't a hard coin to find high grade '64 proof sets, I think it's best to let it alone. The slightly darker streaks are noticeable, but they really don't cause a problem, in my opinion. If you want to have the coin(s) conserved because of their sentimental value, then one of the TPG Conservation/Encapsulation packages would be a good bet. The holder looks like an aftermarket (Capital?) plastic hard case does it say 'Proof Set' or 'Mint Set' somewhere on the front? Does anyone have experience with proof sets that were kept in a humid environment, possibly near saltwater, or in direct sunlight? Something keeps making me think that this might be the case. ANA ID: 3203813 - CONECA ID: N-5637 Clean a coin that may be worth collecting? Please DON'T! When in doubt, leave it dirty!! 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
676 Posts |
I've seen silver turn a chocolate milk brown, one of the modern proof commemoratives I bought for stacking was an ugly brown color.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
the holder it is Capital one and not the Mint. The quarter seem to be proof one, but from your photos hard to see. Maybe pics without holder will be better. Those holders are not seal.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
25687 Posts |
The assumption being made is that all of the coins in this aftermarket holder came from the same proof set.
Methinks that is not the case.
Inordinately fascinated by bits of metal with strange markings and figures
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
This other coin has the same tool marks as well.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
Tjames88 when you say "tool mark" do you referee to the Die?.
For me your cent from the set it is not an Proof. The Proofs from 1956 inclusive 1964 was beauties. Almost perfect lusters and the planchets and Dies very well polish. This it is the reason why Eva Adams go in 1965, 66 and 67 for SMS because was cost less for preparations and faster.
Except the Nickel in your set by photos provide I do not see Proof.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
676 Posts |
Lathe lines maybe? I see lathe lines in the last picture posted, as well as some of the other pictures.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
The marks on the other coin are from an sms coin. The marks on my mine match those as well.  |
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
That's what I was wondering because those exact marks in the other picture are from an sms coin. My pictures are unclear but I can see them clearly on the coin in person it's just hard to get a decent picture. Has to be the polishing marks
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
No ways you to find those SMS 1964, this it is just folks or mirages.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
196 Posts |
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 27 / Views: 1,639 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 08/07/2023 09:36 am
