Looking through my half century old -- and older --packet proof sets last January, a few coins were toned. I purchased a couple of dozen plastic proof coin holders back then planning to transfer all proof sets from the original mint cellophane. I've delayed that project. I need a good plan not to cause the damage I seek to avoid.
I find in @tropicalbat's thread an opportunity to -- at the very least, learn more - and perhaps sidestep a now-planned misstep, if some will oblige. I'm not sure posting my issues on @tropicalbat's thread is kosher but, here goes!
I posted a thread: "Assistance, Please, In Understanding Proof 1955 LWC
D?r " on 1/25/2021. The feedback was sage and helpful as any who care to see will see. Mine is posted and reachable. Re-posting stuff would be tedium to prospective helpers.
I learned much in January. I gleaned more sage educational guidance from this thread. Hence, I deepened my study of @tropicalbat's coin. Focusing on just the leftmost dot in EPU on both coins, mine and @tropicalbat's, I see a relationship in those obscure devices, however, not a sameness.
A past problem lies in my decision to image mine in-package, making issues harder to diagnose. Ought I proceed to transfer this proof set and image this directly in the process? As you see, tarnishing has not vexed this packet. It's not presently on my list.
That advice on handling just solicited is not nearly as valuable to me as would be any expert insight into the related/unrelated nature of these two coins.
Edit inspired by CentStation: http://goccf.com/t/391488#3349662
Given the option of choosing between a very interesting coin or a rather valuable one, I'd choose the former every time . My vexation lies in the fact that the two so often coincide.
Edited by Kcm
07/31/2021 4:27 pm