RWB

There are limited practical uses for this technology in American numismatics. It could be used to profile and examine overdates and repunched mintmarks, confirm doubled die coins, characterize counterfeits, produce precise and repeatable distance measurements for relief elements. We already understand that so-called “Longacre doubling” was caused by a punch or logotype being struck too hard when impressed into a working die. This allowed some of the punch matrix to contact the die surface and then transfer to coins. One small refinement now understood by direct relief measurements is that the original logotypes were too shallow for coin use. That is, the individual letters were not long enough from matrix to top surface to produce a clear impression in a die. These punches and logos were commonly made on individual contracts with outside diesinkers – only a few were by Longacre.

Scott, There are no qualifications to be a "coin dealer." None; or to add any of the industry puffery such as "expert", "Highest prices paid for gold", "Lowest prices on gold," etc.

This might be a clearer image of mushy details on a coin. This is the letter "I" in LIBERTY on a modern quarter. Any metal not parallel to the coin's field (table) contributes to reduced contrast and softer-looking details. Notice the irregular top surface of the letter, and the slight rise in the field adjacent to the letter. (Last photo, I promise. I know everyone's bored stiff with this.... )

Looks like his right eye was damaged....

It will help if you can crop the photos so only the coins show, and lighten them to make it easier to identify.

Here is a more visually oriented approach. (Image profile diagram is exaggerated.) At upper left is a relief image of the word LIBERTY on a current quarter. Blue indicates lower and red higher relief relative to one another. The thin red diagonal line shows were a detailed measurement was taken. Upper right is a color image showing a selected relief measured range across the L and I, ending just before the letter B. At bottom is the measured relief beginning just left of the L and ending just left of the B. The light blue/cyan color line is the profile. Red “Xs” mark relief height measurement points. The greatest point of relief on the letter I is 0.028mm above the field; the greatest relief on the L is 0.023mm above the field. The profile shows that the top of both letters is not flat, but irregular. Further, the letter I has greater relief above the field than the letter L. (Is this due to metal flow or die design?) Notice the red angles where each letter intersects the field. The blue/cyan profile clearly shows broad curvature, and the outside angles are in excess of 114 degrees. The result of these measurements is to show why modern coins look “mushy.” [Measurements made with a Keyence 3D Optical Profilometer, VR-6000 Series.]

I'm in touch with several Trade Dollar specialists. I've seen samples from them and offered suggestions, including reconstructed pages and images. I've made a couple of rough outlines for my own use. That's where things stand at present.

Enlargement of the group photos suggests they are mostly lightly circulated coins with lots of scratches. Your 1880-S is likely one of the many 1880/79 over date varieties.

N H Ourso -- Here is a photo of the mintmark on an authentic 1884-S Morgan silver dollar. They all resemble this photo with minor variations from one reverse die to the next. Also, an 1884-S coin is not rare except in choice uncirculated condition. A nice looking extremely fine condition coin has a retail value of about $75. Your coin is a badly scratched 1884-O with rim damage. It is a common date/mint in common condition.

The photo shows an 1884-O (round "O") with damage and lots of scratches, etc. There are no O/S varieties listed on VAMworld.

Could we be reading the question incorrectly? Did the OP really intend to say "proof reverse" rather than "reverse proof" or possibly "80 proof?"

There is a good series of Polish coins issued under the dictatorship of Russia.

"Blue" points were exchanged for oysters, and "Red" points were exchanged for herring.....Well, that's what the internet says. Here's a short explanation: https://bobstokens.com/the-history-of-opa-tokens/ Here's ANA's article: https://www.money.org/collector/user_66708/blog/a-guide-to-ww2-opa-tokens-an-obscure-section-of-numismatics Here's Wikkidoodle's version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Price_Administration

The slope on a coin alphanumerical character or design-relief edge is never zero degrees (i.e. perpendicular to the face (table). If the slope is too small, the coin will stick to a die and get smashed against the next planchet. (Ten degrees is near the minimum practical limit.) "Stickiness" is caused by changes in die steel and planchet alloy during deformation, friction, impact recrystallization of alloy, and vacuum suction as the coin tries to release from the die. The latter is a particular problem with high relief coin designs such as 1921 Peace dollars, and 1850 double eagles struck with vertical toggle presses.

The title is from a post on this thread: https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/426807-1987-p-dime-possible-error/. It refers to circulation coins from the 1980s. A useful answer deserves more than being buried in an obscure spot. Several factors go into the visual sharpness of a struck coin. The most commonly noted are the pressure used to strike a coin, and the softness of planchets before striking. Softer planchets mean that metal flows better into recesses of dies and this increases the uniformity of relief height above the fields. Increased striking pressure has a similar result but the metal tends to recrystallize differently than with softer planchets. Visually there is little differences except under high magnification. Before changing to clad metal planchets in 1965, the Mint Bureau did extensive testing to determine changes in processes and dies that would improve the durability of equipment. Experimentation continued over several years and one of the more significant findings was that the intersection of relief and the table (field) on a die was a critical stress point and source of metal failure. (This can be seen on Morgan dollars where die cracks often originate and connect these intersections.) To reduce this stress concentration and thereby increase die life, the Mint Bureau made two significant changes. The first was to make the relief-to-table intersection less abrupt – that is, to smooth the curve and thereby disperse stress along a greater area. The second involved changing the slope of the sides of relief – especially inscriptions. This is the angle between the top surface of a letter and the junction with the table (field). For coins whose reductions and master dies were made before adoption of the Janvier reducing lathe, this is about 10 degrees. For coins made during the Janvier lathe reduction era the angle increases to about 15-18 degrees. Current coins, such as quarters, have a measured relief slope of about 24 degrees. Our eyes perceive sharpness as a function of contrast. Greater contrast produces greater visual detail and a stronger perception of relief. As the side slope of inscriptions increases, more light is scattered from the shallower angle and the total contrast of a letter with the flat field decreases – making the letter look “softer” and “flatter” even if its height above the field is unchanged. Further, smoothing the intersection of relief and table (field) scatters more light, thereby reducing contrast and apparent sharpness. (The reverse of peace dollars 1922-1928 is a notable example of excessive slope.) The effects of these, and relief alterations produce coins that are “mushy” or lack the acuity of detail that we see in older coins. During the 1980s some experimental changes were put into production with the result that much of the coinage lacked sharpness and visual clarity. Modern die making uses machine tools, and these can change the factors mentioned above. But so far the US Mint refuses to return to more acute angles for low-mintage commemorative and NCLT bullion coins.

See new post for reply.

'Cause it was a cast copy of the photo of a cast copy of a cast copy....

Is that him squeezing out of a roll-over....or is he merely searching for his bottle?

It's also a good way to see if there are outstanding warrants for your neighbors, or if the lady on the next bar stool is collectible.

Legitimate tubes or rolls of quarters hold 40 coins, not 25. Is he using small dollar tubes to mislead people?

Won't change anything - the coin is ruined.

Quarter and half dollar rolls hold $10 face -- 40 and 20 coins respectively. Nickel rolls are $2 - 40 nickels and cent rolls are $0.50 - 50 coins. Large dollar rolls are $20 face - 20 coins and small dollar rolls are $25 - 25 coins.

What a greedy waste for the nice 1896-S half....

You'll have to ask NGC or PCGS or ANACS....I can only speculate.

So....every year people up and down US 60 exchange unwanted items with each other, then trade them back the next year.... curious. How long does it take for great-grandma's 5-lb flat iron to travel from one end to the other? (Just kidding.)