Prooflike or satin.....which do you prefer?

[SethChandler-migration]

I have always prefered that soft, velvetity, satin look to original coins. PL just never really did it for me. Too many marks, hairlines show up easily. Just buy the Proof!

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Seth

[keithdagen]

Not a big fan of proofs coins, but I definitely prefer the look of the satin or matte proofs over their mirrored brothers.

[TomB]

Satiny coins have a wonderful "feel" and allow original patina to stand out. They also allow for terrific, gradient changes in luster and color. I generally prefer satiny finishes on coins. Prooflike coins have a completely different look. The marks on the surface show up well on prooflike coins and color changes stand out very well. This can lead to dramatic color effects that can really help brighten a piece. They also generally have great luster. While I prefer a satiny coin, I also like to have the prooflike specimens within my collection as a change of pace.

[MikeKing]

I agree with your feeling about PL vs PF. PF is great, but would much prefer a coin with satiny or cartwheel luster over a proof-like anytime. You're right, too many flaws.

[michael]

as long as the coins i like have exceptional/tremendous eye appeal and qualities it really doesnot matter to me!

 

sincerely michael

[lclugza]

As I have both Mint State and Proof coins, I think I would prefer a satin finish on the Uncirculated ones, just to have something that looks different from a Proof. To paraphrase what someone else said, if I want to see a mirror finish I'll simply buy a Proof. Don't scratches look much worse on a prooflike?

[BushMan]

I collect mostly business strike Seated Halves, though I do love the few Cameo Seated Halves I own. I'd prefer the coins in UCAM, though it is another big step up. I don't own too many Morgan Dollars, though a good number of them are PL and DMPL. I really like the contrast. I do appreciate your point about the marks showing up. Finding coins with a minimum of marks is a real chore!

 

It's a matter of personal preference.

[CarlWohlforth]

I started out buying proof like Morgans. I always have liked cameo proof coins and these seemed a poor mans way of assembling a set. Then I realized to get one that is really frosty and mark free I am paying near proof prices.

 

As a type collector I am buying proof coins where possible. When I buy a mint state coin I look for a proof like example. I do love a coin with rich, thick luster too. Let's face it, I like them all

 

Here is an image of a proof like gold dollar:

 

[true_grade]

I have always prefered that soft, velvetity, satin look to original coins. PL just never really did it for me. Too many marks, hairlines show up easily. Just buy the Proof!

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Seth

 

Sorry, but a Proof is just a "reproduction".IMO

 

I want a coin that has been used in the real world. Not one just made to go from the press to the holder.

 

 

[Weidel Legacy Collection]

 

Sorry, but a Proof is just a "reproduction".IMO

 

I want a coin that has been used in the real world. Not one just made to go from the press to the holder.

 

 

And that is what makes the collecting world go 'round. Your opinion on proofs isn't shared by everyone. I collect what I like, so do you, and everyone else out there. High end '50's to '64 deep cameo proof coins are miniature works of art that I enjoy collecting very much. But, of course, that's just MHO

[jom]

I've never cared too much for brilliant proofs and since satin proofs (I think I got the term right) don't have much luster, I don't care for either. Give give me nice regular old luster with a bit of color....

 

jom

[msmhappy]

 

 

 

Sorry, but a Proof is just a "reproduction".IMO

 

I want a coin that has been used in the real world. Not one just made to go from the press to the holder.

 

 

Ben, I like circulated coins as well as you do!!

 

But, remember!! Proof is a condition. A specially made coin, made just for the collector!! Like me and you!!!

 

And, dont forget!! "The coins you like so much", Regular strike coins. Are sealed in holders as well!!!!!!

 

 

 

mike

 

--------------------------

 

dont forget! collect proof sets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Leothelion]

I have always prefered that soft, velvetity, satin look to original coins. PL just never really did it for me. Too many marks, hairlines show up easily. Just buy the Proof!

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Seth

 

I think we're mixing oranges with apples here unless there are proof coins actually getting the PL designation. Otherwise I'm lost here.

 

Leo

[GDJMSP]

But, remember!! Proof is a condition. A specially made coin, made just for the collector!! Like me and you!!!

 

mike

 

A fine point maybe - but Proof is not a condition. It is a method of manufacture - as you said - " a specially made coin ".

 

As to a preference of brillant or satin - I like 'em both.

[msmhappy]

 

 

Yea, Well , OK!!!

 

 

I applogize to everyone! I'm Sorry!! I made a mistake, a human error, Damn!! that means I'm human!!! Oh well!!!

 

mike

 

-------------------------

 

dont forget! collect proof sets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Leothelion]

Would you two be so kind and stop bickering and answer my post?

 

Leo

[darktone]

I prefer my prooflike in between my satin and frosty gold. mike

[GDJMSP]

I think we're mixing oranges with apples here unless there are proof coins actually getting the PL designation. Otherwise I'm lost here.

 

Leo - I took the question to mean which was prefered - brilliant Proof Like or satin finish coins - with neither of them being an actual Proof.

[coinman1794]

I have always prefered that soft, velvetity, satin look to original coins. PL just never really did it for me. Too many marks, hairlines show up easily. Just buy the Proof!

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Seth

 

I think we're mixing oranges with apples here unless there are proof coins actually getting the PL designation. Otherwise I'm lost here.

 

Leo

 

We are just comparing business strikes which have either satiny or proof-like finishes and deciding which ones we prefer and why.

 

I like both, personally. To use Sacagawea Dollars as an easy example (as they are commonly found in PL and non-PL). A PL Sac looks totally different than a satiny one. I personally find both attractive in their own ways. PL surfaces do accentuate abrasions, so, I like PL's best in MS67 and up. In those grades, the PL luster drowns out abrasions almost completely and you have to strain to find any problems, whereas, on a satiny MS67 Sac, you will see a few tiny marks.

 

Now, in order to be diplomatic about the issue of "my discussion about" and "my liking of" these dollars: If anyone is offended by my use of the Sacagawea Dollar as an example, then I am sorry .

 

[MikeKing]

I want a coin that has been used in the real world

 

I love proofs, but you have a point well taken.

There are stamp collectors who prefer the stamp right on the envelope. Makes sense...doesn't it? You're collecting something that did what it was meant to do. There's a beauty to that. And some people I know prefer stamps over coins because you can find them postmarked on actual letters you can read from long long ago.

 

But also, the proof is what the coin architect wanted it to be artistically. And among the proofs there are rarities in the heavy cameo types that are truly elusive in earlier years. There's a beauty to the product of creation that lasts for only a few strikes, both aesthetically and intellectually.

[true_grade]

I want a coin that has been used in the real world

 

I love proofs, but you have a point well taken.

There are stamp collectors who prefer the stamp right on the envelope. Makes sense...doesn't it? You're collecting something that did what it was meant to do. There's a beauty to that. And some people I know prefer stamps over coins because you can find them postmarked on actual letters you can read from long long ago.

 

But also, the proof is what the coin architect wanted it to be artistically. And among the proofs there are rarities in the heavy cameo types that are truly elusive in earlier years. There's a beauty to the product of creation that lasts for only a few strikes, both aesthetically and intellectually.

 

I believe I agree with your statement.

 

I just prefer to hold a coin that actually “contributed” in history, knowing that someone “might” have used that coin to purchase flour, sugar, land, adult fun; or someone possibly of a famous background actually having it in their pocket.

 

To me, that is part of the impression surrounding a coin. Other than that, it is just that, some art on a piece of metal. I can go to any art museum and see sculptures that were only meant to be adorned.

 

If that is why you collect coins-great! It makes no bones to me whether you collect coins to use as target practice in a urinal (just let me know so I can boil them before I touch ‘em). Just as long as you're collecting.

 

 

 

 

 

[Leothelion]

I'm again, I thought we were talking about business strikes and not proofs?!

 

Leo

[true_grade]

I'm again, I thought we were talking about business strikes and not proofs?!

 

Leo

 

I think maybe that is why there is a quote in the post and the post is in reply to that quote.

 

 

[Leothelion]

I have always prefered that soft, velvetity, satin look to original coins. PL just never really did it for me. Too many marks, hairlines show up easily. Just buy the Proof!

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Seth

 

OK, maybe now, I understand this thread. Let me say, To each his own! I collect the PL business strikes because I think they are awesome. To have that prooflike finish on a business strike makes for a very uncommon coin, almost unique.

Here are a few I have pictures. See the attachments.

 

Leo

[Leothelion]

Here's another that I like. An 1985-D.

[SethChandler-migration]

Sorry everyone for the confusion. I'm not a wizard on the keyboard, yet. This thread reminds me of a conversion with my wife where English is a second language for her. "Hey honey, do ya wanna go out for steak tonight?.......sure, I could use a break for an hour." Happens all the time.

 

This thread could be about anything we want, but it wasn't really about proof coins at all. It was about the various differences that business strikes can come. Isn't it amazing that by the sames dies you can have a deep cameo prooflike gem that looks very closely to a proof and with a little bit of die wear it produces a dull, flat, lifeless coin. Interesting.

 

I have always prefered a satinity, slightly frosted coin vs. a prooflike. Think about it. Take a Seated half dollar for example, a relatively common coin in prooflike. In a near perfect prooflike coin, MS66 to 67, the similiarities are (somewhat?)close vs. a full blown proof. I believe that a satinity, velvetity, gem is so much more desirable and rarer than the Prooflike.

 

Seth

[Leothelion]

Like this one?! Again, see attachment.

 

Leo