RWB

No. The Pratt pattern was known only to Pratt, Barber and Pres. Roosevelt. The accession card merely says "1908 $5. Gift of W. S. Bigelow." The pattern would only be evident to someone who had seen the coin and been told what ti as, or had read the archived internal documentation. When the collection was auctioned, everyone associated with long dead.

There was no intention of "degrading" you or anyone else, and you should not assume that was its purpose. So much of the material presented here is obviously damage, or somehow created by misleading internet junk, that it is difficult to imaging anyone remotely thinking otherwise. Jfanti's coin is not damaged. Merely misunderstood; yet that does not respond to the Gov. of Alabama's comment "Use some common sense, people."

Whoever told you this should be on your "Do not listen to" list.

I've asked this before -- but, why would jfantj think this was in any way of value? Same question for road-kill coins, holes punched in them, invisible "doubling" damage? What is fueling this?

Demand a refund!

Unpeckable = "Not peckable," as in a pun on "impeccable."

Or...they might have been in museum collections but never displayed or accessed in modern times. Lots of these museum coins have been sold at auction. The only known Pratt $5 pattern might have been among those sold by the Boston Museum. No one knew about the pattern back then. When the collection was sold the pattern likely went out the door to be lost.

Yep...and we've lost an important resource for research and law enforcement recovery of stolen coins with known auction backgrounds.

I'll leave that to those who want to explore the subject. When working with the Newman papers a decade ago, it was low on the biographical research list.

It was once common for auction companies to take nice coin photos on B&W or color film, then print life-size illustrations in their catalogs. After the sale the negatives/slides were filed, forgotten and thrown out. All we have today are the low quality printed catalogs. Imagine the information lost (and the potential revenue).

Sarcastic response: "Roll the dice."

Nice bonus! Does he reveal any secrets? RE: Kosoff. Just another reason for him to burn his papers....which only screws up things from modern collectors -- such as the origin of the "Menjou" auctions. (Mr. Lange -- Is there a single-source compilation of the kind of information you mentioned? would be nice to have all of this collected into one "master" document.

As an example, Roman God "Jupiter" is spelled "IVPPITER" in classical Latin. (Pronounced approximately: eYu-pe-teh) [Side note: the Roman known as Julius Caesar in English was in classical Latin IVLIVS CAESAR and pronounced approx: eYul-eYus Ky-sar ]

Mr. Franklin: Relief on a coin - portrait, lettering, etc. - is always slightly "V" shaped when viewed on edge. This allows the coin to release from the dies. It also means that as the design wears during circulation, wider parts of letters and other relief become visible as the top layers of metal are worn off. The cent posted is entirely normal, although it might possibly be some barely-visible variety of no added value.

The fundamental problem is that no sources of any kind were presented. Thus, verification was/is impossible. Akers has credentials as a hands-on dealer; Breen is worthless in this regard, and the more I see of his "work" the greater the bologna content. Presently, I trust nothing he wrote unless I can independently verify.

Comparette acquired new coins for Mitchelson/CSL and a few other museum collections. I've never located a list of these, but the context in Comparette's letters imply the number was small -- possibly 3 to 5. The original letters are in the State Archives (I accessed some of these during book research. They were very "stingy" with access and making copies.) If the original receiving collections could be identified, we might have more examples of pristine coins made from fresh dies -- and then be able to better clarify the situation with [false] "Specimen" coins.

A stain from something. Coins get rough treatment.

The US Mints were among the most popular tourist attractions in Philadelphia and San Francisco. They were not only similar to many factories, but they held unimaginable wealth that people could see being handled as if it were blocks of scrap metal. The 1880s were an especially rich period for newspaper articles about the mints and for photos of operations. Although most photos were awful - poor lighting, blurring, lens flare, limited dynamic range, posed rather than candid - publications had prints made, and illustrators then copied and "improved" them into the engravings commonly seen in publications of the time. (Compare Johnston's photo originals to illustrations made from them.) George G. Evans was able to gain a virtual concession at the Philadelphia Mint. His book on the mint was sold to visitors on-site just as were proof sets, dime-size Lord's Prayer tokens and other souvenirs. Except for proof sets and Mint medals, the "Conductors" split the profits on books and tokens. This resulted in some overly aggressive selling, and letters of complaint. Here's an example from May 26, 1885. Complaint has been made that a guide who conducts visitors through the Mint Building presents a medal made for the Louisville Exposition which he claims to be gold and gives to visitors, but to those only who purchase a book [Evans'] which he offers for sale. As the Conductors are paid for their services they ought not to annoy visitors by importuning them to buy articles in their possession they may have for sale; and if on inquiry you find any cause for the complaint, please take such action to prevent it as you deem for the interests and reputation of the service. It is not widely known among coin collectors, but the San Francisco Mint had a nice cabinet of locally produced coins and private gold pieces, plus a full set of U.S. Mint medals on display along with ore samples from western states. Records, if they still exist, are at NARA San Bruno. Here's a letter about the number of visitors for FY 1896 at Philadelphia: Philadelphia June 30, 1896 The number of persons from all parts of the United States, and in fact the World, who have visited, and have been escorted through the Mint, and witnessed the coining of money, and the other work done under your supervision, during the Fiscal year, ending 30th June were One hundred and five thousand, three hundred and eighty four, 105,384.

Correct. I changed the originals to the brighter and altered color balance ones. Thought that was evident in my post. Sorry.

Joe, that's good information for others to know -- taking really good coin photos -- ones like yours -- is not as easy as some like to pretend. Plastic slabs make the whole thing more difficult not only because of the first and second reflections from the plastic, and plastic deformation, but from the inconsistent angle at which coins are inserted. My post was not intended to be negatively critical -- just an informational opinion. I would not hesitate to have you photograph my coin collection -- if I had one.

Mitchelson donated his entire collection to the Connecticut State Library with the stipulation that current coins were to be added for each year as they were issued. For many years after Mitchelson's death, the State librarian, Godard, worked directly with the Mint Cabinet Curator, T. Louis Comparette, to provide new coins. Most of these were fresh off new dies and are possibly the finest pieces in existence --- never cleaned or "improved." I've examined parts of the collection and it forms some of the information basis for my objections to undocumented titling of nice circulation coins as "Specimen" or similar false language. When Comparette died in 1922, and with transfer of the Mint's Cabinet to SI, the flow of new coins quickly diminished. SI continued to buy annual coins from the Mint, but they were no longer the highest quality, with some exceptions.

In this letter, noted collector Joseph Mitchelson (now the Connecticut State Coin Collection) was told to send $20 - face value - for one of the patterns, and Director Leach would try to get a coin for him. December 30, 1907 From: Leach To: Joseph Mitchelson Your letters of the 20th and 25th at hand. Send me $20 and return postage and Registration fee and I will try to secure one of the $20 for you. Mr. Kunz has already applied for trial piece of the first designs for his Society, I do not think there are any left of the first model. If you will send another $20 for your Society I will also endeavor to secure a coin for it as well…

From the BBC. The Royal Mint is busy: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-60796417

Excellent points, Coinbuf. However much we happen to enjoy this hobby, it is tiny, has a tiny market segment, and correspondingly minuscule ability to absorb new material. A handful of coins from certain date/mint combinations would crash the "value" of "rarities."

We have no reliable information about the quantity of proof quarters (1936-42) that have not been evaluated for cameo contrast. We also do not have an empirical standard for the term, although this seems to be better understood than the PL language.