Errorists Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 (edited) why do so many proof die cracks look UCAM on the crack itself? Doesn't seem to happen on Business Stikes. Edited March 1 by Errorists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 I think it is just the fact that the fields are proof, so that amplifies the raw metal and makes it appear like a matt cameo look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errorists Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 On 3/1/2024 at 4:16 PM, J P M said: I think it is just the fact that the fields are proof, so that amplifies the raw metal and makes it appear like a matt cameo look. Seems to be amplified more with silver and gold coins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 But, but one learned member elsewhere disputed that this thing happened the way you say it did and now you are taking the liberty of embellishing your discovery with whipped cream! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P M Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 (edited) On 3/1/2024 at 6:23 PM, Henri Charriere said: But, but one learned member elsewhere disputed that this thing happened the way you say it did and now you are taking the liberty of embellishing your discovery with whipped cream! It is raised not incuse, so it is more likely to be a die crack than a strike through Henri. No matter what it is it is not a scratch, so it is a variety of one kind or another. Edited March 1 by J P M Henri Charriere and Errorists 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errorists Posted March 1 Author Share Posted March 1 On 3/1/2024 at 5:34 PM, J P M said: It is raised not incuse, so it is more likely to be a die crack than a strike through Henri. No matter what it is it is not a scratch, so it is a variety of one kind or another. Now what Henri? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 On 3/1/2024 at 6:56 PM, Errorists said: Now what Henri? If the House of Morgan deems it to be a variety, it is exempt from my Statute of Limitatations which, at least presently, applies only to ERRORS. I may have to carve out a special variance for you as it appears, while your predilection is unusual, you appear to know what you are talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errorists Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 (edited) On 3/1/2024 at 6:08 PM, Henri Charriere said: If the House of Morgan deems it to be a variety, it is exempt from my Statute of Limitatations which, at least presently, applies only to ERRORS. I may have to carve out a special variance for you as it appears, while your predilection is unusual, you appear to know what you are talking about. Well I do have numerous examples of such type coins that exhibit the UCAM features on the crack. Here is another example of one. Edited March 2 by Errorists Henri Charriere 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Greenstang Posted March 2 Popular Post Share Posted March 2 On proof coins, the fields on the die are polished to give them that “ shiny” look. As a die crack is incuse on the die, it does not get polished so retains the cameo look. J P M, Sandon and Henri Charriere 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errorists Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 On 3/1/2024 at 6:18 PM, Greenstang said: On proof coins, the fields on the die are polished to give them that “ shiny” look. As a die crack is incuse on the die, it does not get polished so retains the cameo look. So the planchet flows into the die when struck and getting squeezed into the crack. Still don't understand how it gets the UCAM effect from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandon Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 The cracks don't look exactly like the frosted devices, whose contrast I understand is enhanced during the die preparation process by (depending on the era) a nitric acid solution, sandblasting, or lasers. However, the metal that squeezed into the die crack doesn't have the mirror surface of the fields imparted either, so it contrasts with the fields. The 1958 quarter that you originally posted wouldn't qualify for a "cameo" designation, but the crack still contrasts with the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errorists Posted March 2 Author Share Posted March 2 On 3/1/2024 at 6:52 PM, Sandon said: The cracks don't look exactly like the frosted devices, whose contrast I understand is enhanced during the die preparation process by (depending on the era) a nitric acid solution, sandblasting, or lasers. However, the metal that squeezed into the die crack doesn't have the mirror surface of the fields imparted either, so it contrasts with the fields. The 1958 quarter that you originally posted wouldn't qualify for a "cameo" designation, but the crack still contrasts with the field. Hummmm the 2000 example I posted is a proof69 UCAM designation. The crack is even more frosted then the rest of the frosted devices on the coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...