Cheburgen Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Thanks, I already have example how you "translate" letter from Tuukka Talvio.I don't need another. I think you next message will be dk_spb wanted to say .... Thranslate this: "So you can say that proof coins were indeed minted in Finland but only for special purposes, and with a technique that was less developed than today". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 <Если я мешаю кому-то наябывать клиентов, втюхивая несуществующий пруф Nobody is doing such things. Finnish Proofs are in slabs and there is nobody who can influence graders from NGC. If you are saying that WCO sent the coin to NGC and told them that this coin is proof and it should be graded as proof, you are mistaken. Try to send one of your coin first for grade and then you can say something about grades, NGC, proof, prooflike. Once again, if you did not have or do not have or did not see such coins it does not mean they do not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 ...About meaning: Prooflike - first strike coins minted by standard business process which have a mirror surface. ... Definition for word "Prooflike". "Prooflike" is NOT a coin, and in many cases have nothing to do with first strike. Prooflike refers to certain degree of reflectivity of fields of a coin (business strike). The coin may be made with new dies or with old dies but polished (and we know that dies during their lifetime were sometimes polished, and may be even 3-4 times) or Prooflike coin may be made with VERY OLD DIES where surfaces of dies after striking a lot of coins become dense and produce highly mirrorlike surface. And Finnish coins are known to be MS, MS Prooflikes and Proofs. best regards, WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Please - if you don't have the sources or valid points to contribute to the discussion, kindly refrain on making unnecessary or bias comments. Some off comments are nice at times but I believe this is starting to be a rather serious discussion thread. I read through these 7 pages and it doesn't seem to make any sense. No offense to anyone As well as, please kindly refrain from using Russian unless it's quoting off from numismatic materials. Please remember that this is an English forum! I'll keep myself quiet for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 <but I believe this is starting to be a rather serious discussion. Oh... sorry, nothing serious. I think that we should close this thread and open another one. Something like: "Graders in NGC are clowns" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timewarp Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Sometimes coins look very different. Here is one example, I really can't choose which one to keep. Second coin looks "black", but it's like mirror. You can see your own face, if look into it.. Which one you think is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gxseries Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Excellent examples Timewarp - good comparsion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Sometimes coins look very different. Here is one example, I really can't choose which one to keep. Second coin looks "black", but it's like mirror. You can see your own face, if look into it.. Which one you think is better? These both coins look for me as Business Strikes. First with frosty luster and second Prooflike or semi-Prooflike. Both are nice coins, but not subject to our discassion about Proofs. WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timewarp Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 but not subject to our discassion about Proofs.Sorry, but there are no finnish proofs. That is best you can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldman Posted April 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 ...second Prooflike or semi-Prooflike. WCO ...or heavily dipped.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Sorry, but there are no finnish proofs. That is best you can do. So, and basically by publishing the pictures of prooflike, you are trying to say that there is no proofs? That is how you prove your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCO Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Just for comparison purposes with the two coins above want to add this coin: http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003000045_1.jpg http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003000045_2.jpg Does it look somewhat different from the two coins above? Graded by NGC PR-66CAMEO WCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk_spb Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Just for comparison purposes with the two coins above want to add this coin: http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003000045_1.jpg http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003000045_2.jpg Does it look somewhat different from the two coins above? Graded by NGC PR-66CAMEO WCO Wow!!! Many differences from your gold proof coin. All lines of greed are present. May be light is not enough? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk_spb Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 My friend...And there is still so little knowledge about coins in Russia and Finland that for decades Irving Goodman catalogue printed in United States was the best reference for Russian coins. My friend, you said "bla-bla-bla" again! Please tell me numbers of items (or lots) from Irving Goodman catalogue for "a dozen Finnish coins". I think you have this catalogue and you already read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk_spb Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 As well as, please kindly refrain from using Russian unless it's quoting off from numismatic materials. Please remember that this is an English forum! <edited> akdrv Question for all (it is not fact for discuss and it is very interesting for me): could anybody compare quantity of coins graded by NGC as proof and as prooflike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk_spb Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Try to send one of your coin first for grade You knoew that is an impossible because I can't send any coins minted before 1957 from Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dk_spb Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Prooflike refers to certain degree of reflectivity of fields of a coin (business strike). The coin may be made with new dies or with old dies but polished (and we know that dies during their lifetime were sometimes polished, and may be even 3-4 times) Yes, of course. But after their lifetime ;-) Very very old dies polished till lost of details ;-) As your 20M1913 I think you have the best scans of your 20m1913. Please show me scans with all details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheburgen Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 <edited> akdrv Question for all (it is not fact for discuss and it is very interesting for me): could anybody compare quantity of coins graded by NGC as proof and as prooflike? Why don't you do it here yourself? http://www.ngccoin.com/poplookup/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akdrv Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 I'm closing this topic, as it's obviously not going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.