1936 Buffalo proof – sold for $99,000 ! 2 2

[FlyingAl]

On 11/23/2022 at 4:17 PM, VKurtB said:

For many years now I’ve decided that I agree with the artists and sculptors and disagree with the bulk of collectors. It’s why I still buy most modern uncirc coins but very few proofs. They’re too “cartoonish” to me. 

Modern proofs are indeed cartoony looking. Ever since the San Francisco mint took over proof production, everything just went down the drain IMO. 

However, there are some really nice 1936-42 brilliant proofs. 

[robec1347]

On 11/24/2022 at 2:23 PM, FlyingAl said:

Modern proofs are indeed cartoony looking. Ever since the San Francisco mint took over proof production, everything just went down the drain IMO. 

However, there are some really nice 1936-42 brilliant proofs. 

They would have been cartoony no matter which mint took over proof production. The phony cameo effect they use now wasn’t  due to being made in San Francisco. 

[Quintus Arrius]

@FlyingAl:

'tis a shame indeed one must go back decades to procure a product produced by the USG worth having...

[robec1347]

On 11/24/2022 at 3:38 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

@FlyingAl:

'tis a shame indeed one must go back decades to procure a product produced by the USG worth having...

The golden age end in 1947 with the Walkers. 

[Quintus Arrius]

On 11/24/2022 at 6:41 PM, robec1347 said:

The golden age end in 1947 with the Walkers. 

And, depending on one's point of view, the 1947 Mexico 50-Pesos (gold) Centenario, which if memory serves, was one of the larger troy ounce-plus bullion coins produced.

Edited November 24, 2022 by Quintus Arrius
Insert word.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/24/2022 at 5:23 PM, FlyingAl said:

Modern proofs are indeed cartoony looking. Ever since the San Francisco mint took over proof production, everything just went down the drain IMO.  However, there are some really nice 1936-42 brilliant proofs. 

You don't like the nice-dark look of modern, mirror-like gold proofs ?

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/24/2022 at 6:53 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

And, depending on one's point of view, the 1947 Mexico 50-Pesos (gold) Centenario, which if memory serves, was one of the larger troy ounce-plus bullion coins produced.

1.2 ounces, right ?  I think it's listed in BARRON's weekly gold coin price list.

[Quintus Arrius]

On 11/24/2022 at 11:28 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

1.2 ounces, right ?  I think it's listed in BARRON's weekly gold coin price list.

Exactly.  I couldn't buy it because the kid who runs the logarithms in eBay's Nebraska security bunker refused to give me the clearance to make the purchase and lied to me saying the bank was the problem.  I was the winning bidder but the real problem is I had no bidding history with which they could judge prior purchases. When the party demanded payment, I explained to them tho I had the money, eBay refused to process it.  He denounced me as a scammer living in a smammer's neighborhood.  On Monday, I went to my bank which promptly advised there had never been a problem.  The seller promptly canceled my order and winning bid, but I have never let bygones be bygones with eBay or PayPal.

[FlyingAl]

On 11/24/2022 at 9:28 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

You don't like the nice-dark look of modern, mirror-like gold proofs ?

No. Not in the slightest. 

Once you see the original, unintentional frost of the die creation process on a 36-42 CAM proof, there's no going back. The modern day laser frosted stuff is just horrid. 

Edited November 25, 2022 by FlyingAl

[Quintus Arrius]

On 11/24/2022 at 11:56 PM, FlyingAl said:

....The modern day laser frosted stuff is just horrid. 

They can flood the market with rubbish, but the discerning eye will always seek out the classics.  A good product doesn't need hype.  It sells itself.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/25/2022 at 10:47 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

They can flood the market with rubbish, but the discerning eye will always seek out the classics.  A good product doesn't need hype.  It sells itself.

To me growing up, proofs were shiny and reflective.  So the 1936-42 Cameos -- though nice -- are different.  If someone wants to post one of them that is top-of-the-line to gauge, please do so. 

[olympicsos]

On 11/25/2022 at 11:41 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

To me growing up, proofs were shiny and reflective.  So the 1936-42 Cameos -- though nice -- are different.  If someone wants to post one of them that is top-of-the-line to gauge, please do so. 

The more advanced I become, the more I see that the classic design artists that objected to a mirror finish proof were right. You can't have nice higher relief designs with curved fields with a mirror finish proof. What mirror finish proofs are good for are the Morgan, Barber, Seated and 2D lifeless modern designs extant today. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/25/2022 at 12:21 PM, olympicsos said:

The more advanced I become, the more I see that the classic design artists that objected to a mirror finish proof were right. You can't have nice higher relief designs with curved fields with a mirror finish proof. What mirror finish proofs are good for are the Morgan, Barber, Seated and 2D lifeless modern designs extant today. 

So your ideal proof would be something like the MCMVII Ultra High Relief Saint ?

[olympicsos]

On 11/25/2022 at 12:22 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

So your ideal proof would be something like the MCMVII Ultra High Relief Saint ?

Sort of. When it comes to Saints, it would be a satin finish proof in high relief. The satin proofs are very underrated. Besides I'd prefer proof coins which respected the artists vision. To be honest the best rendition of the Walking Liberty Half is the 2016 gold centennial piece. No other Walker in silver has the amount of design detail that the gold centennial piece has, I just wished they had a gold piece for the type 2 SLQ. I'll also point out the US Mint is doing the American Gold Buffalo wrong with the mirror finishes. 

[FlyingAl]

On 11/25/2022 at 9:41 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

To me growing up, proofs were shiny and reflective.  So the 1936-42 Cameos -- though nice -- are different.  If someone wants to post one of them that is top-of-the-line to gauge, please do so. 

Here are two nice ones I own. The nickel is not designated CAM, but it should be. The cent is designated CAM.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/25/2022 at 12:26 PM, olympicsos said:

Sort of. When it comes to Saints, it would be a satin finish proof in high relief. The satin proofs are very underrated. Besides I'd prefer proof coins which respected the artists vision. 

I've seen those "Roman proofs" (satin proofs, as you correctly state) and they aren't horrible but IMO no way as beautiful a finish as on the MCMVII UHRs.

On 11/25/2022 at 12:26 PM, olympicsos said:

I'll also point out the US Mint is doing the American Gold Buffalo wrong with the mirror finishes. 

The coin is better in Reverse Proof.  The fields aren't big enough to take advantage of the proof look, IMO.  In other words, the Buffalo and Indian portrait are simply too big for the coin IMO for a great look on proofs...but much better on a Reverse Proof.

JMHO. 

[olympicsos]

On 11/25/2022 at 2:02 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I've seen those "Roman proofs" (satin proofs, as you correctly state) and they aren't horrible but IMO no way as beautiful a finish as on the MCMVII UHRs.

The coin is better in Reverse Proof.  The fields aren't big enough to take advantage of the proof look, IMO.  In other words, the Buffalo and Indian portrait are simply too big for the coin IMO for a great look on proofs...but much better on a Reverse Proof.

JMHO. 

The US Mint makes burnished coins now and they aren't bad. Wouldn't you want to appreciate art the way the artist intended? 

[VKurtB]

On 11/24/2022 at 10:28 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

You don't like the nice-dark look of modern, mirror-like gold proofs ?

No, I do not. Especially the NCLT issues. The basic 5 (excluding dollars) circulating coins are okay, but uninspiring.