kopeikin Posted March 29, 2014 Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 So poltina sold for $11,500. I followed the link for 25 kop - the new owner accepting offers. Interesting. Actually wings down poltina went for 13,500 after comission. Owner also accepts offers. Strange. Price is far from being a bargain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kopeikin Posted March 29, 2014 Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 New e-auction on Kuenker has something similar... but not slabbed.. Which coin do you mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted March 29, 2014 Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 Actually wings down poltina went for 13,500 after comission. Owner also accepts offers. Strange. Price is far from being a bargain. For a great coin there hardly ever can be a bargain, especially in an open auction visible by all. I do not understand why it shows "owner accepts offers" on this one, since I know for sure that it is not the case. Must be some kind of Heritage gimmick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted March 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 Which coin do you mean? 25 kopecks 1829: https://elive-auction.de/auktion?o=%2Flose%2F23763%3Fcategory%3D8827%26order%3Dlosnummer.asc%26seite%3Dindex%26subcategory%3D8887 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted March 30, 2014 Report Share Posted March 30, 2014 About 8 years back I sold most of my 25 kopecks series of 19th century included 1827 wings down Proof 66 ,was not able to find any better for long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMIS Posted April 3, 2014 Report Share Posted April 3, 2014 Hello, everyone! I am new to this forum. Saw an interesting discussion I would like to join. Rain386 mentioned an 1827 25 kop coin from the EPN collection. NGC graded this coin MS62, while EPN had it as proof. What do the esteemed members of this forum think with regards to the type of strike of this coin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candidate Posted April 4, 2014 Report Share Posted April 4, 2014 What do the esteemed members of this forum think with regards to the type of strike of this coin? By photos, it does not look like proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMIS Posted April 4, 2014 Report Share Posted April 4, 2014 By photos, it does not look like proof. Any votes for "proof"? After all, EPN in all probability had more years of experience (and perhaps weight) in numismatics than the combined graders who looked at the coin. Seems doubtful that he made such an obvious mistake... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 By photos, it does not look like proof. I can see some details remain from original struck Proof coin, if some body see the edge of the coin it could be more helpful info. Not Proof any more because was keeping not safe as should be. Rarenum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extant4cell Posted April 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 I found a couple of interesting (for me) Denga coins on eBay recently: the one above was added to the denga collectors guide as previously unknown eagle variant (4/4 feathers in the tail) with 4 petal rosette. And the one below, though it has a bad picture, I believe is also an interesting and uncommon specimen (4/3 feathers in the tail) and uncommon rosette: Possibly, they don't have so much of a collectors value due to the condition, but numismatic values are there as of a reasonably rare variants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 ... Not Proof any more ... Rarenum I did not think Proof coin could become non Proof, but only impaired Proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMIS Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 I did not think Proof coin could become non Proof, but only impaired Proof. Thank you for your opinions as I value them highly. Got to examine the coin in person. You do need good light to 'dig' through layers of dirt and haze to get to the surfaces. I would say it was struck as proof and was mishandled in a manner that is similar to the other Russian proof in the EPN sale, which managed to get a PF grade from NGC due to pretty well preserved reverse. Since EPN kept these coins in pre-WWII envelopes, I would agree the coin is likely to have originated from the 1936 EHR Green sale. Therefore, proper grade should say, 'Proof: impaired by a celebrity.' To put the last nail into the coffin, have you gentlemen handled this variety? Was it business, or proof? I am only familiar with the proof from the Goldberg auction over a decade ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candidate Posted April 5, 2014 Report Share Posted April 5, 2014 IMIS, on 05 Apr 2014 - 6:16 PM, said:To put the last nail into the coffin, have you gentlemen handled this variety? Was it business, or proof? I am only familiar with the proof from the Goldberg auction over a decade ago. I have 2 of same variety ("shield touches the crown"). At "Monetny Dvor" 7 are listed, of them only one (which you 've mentioned already - from Golberg # 5 of June 2000) was in proorf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMIS Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Thank You Candidate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I did not think Proof coin could become non Proof, but only impaired Proof. Hi IgorS, As you know for Proof used the same coins as for regular(business ) struck, just brushed special finished . If surfaces was removed ,for example coin accidently get in circulation or cleaned … we can’t say it is Impaired Proof coin if 20% or 10% of the proof coin remain. Possible to described Proof like surfaces remain on the edge or... But I’m not agree with description ” PROOF IMPAIRED” in conditions if surfaces was removed for last couple hundred years no by mint. For example 25 kopecks from Heritage. It is just my opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Well, we all have opinions and that's what makes things interesting. I will state my understanding.There were multiple styles in making Proof coins around the world. In US, for example, there were a few different Proof coin styles - mirror (brilliant), satin, matte, sand blasting. But, what separates Proof coin from regular business strike is not "brushed special finish", but the entire process. There were carefully prepared dies polished to a mirror like finish, planchets were also specially prepared. Each coin was struck slowly and carefully, sometimes more than once to have full details of the design. As a result, these Proof coins have multiple Proof characteristics, not just the mirror like fields and edge and frosty reliefs of the design. One has to also look for squared-off rims and such. And just because the Proof coin displays the signs of wear or cleaning, it does not make it non Proof. For example, you can see NGC grading coins as PF-58 or lower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 Well, we all have opinions and that's what makes things interesting. I will state my understanding.There were multiple styles in making Proof coins around the world. In US, for example, there were a few different Proof coin styles - mirror (brilliant), satin, matte, sand blasting. But, what separates Proof coin from regular business strike is not "brushed special finish", but the entire process. There were carefully prepared dies polished to a mirror like finish, planchets were also specially prepared. Each coin was struck slowly and carefully, sometimes more than once to have full details of the design. As a result, these Proof coins have multiple Proof characteristics, not just the mirror like fields and edge and frosty reliefs of the design. One has to also look for squared-off rims and such. And just because the Proof coin displays the signs of wear or cleaning, it does not make it non Proof. For example, you can see NGC grading coins as PF-58 or lower. Agree about world coins with different “Proof characteristics”. And not possible to compare Russian with Haiti , Philippines … For Russian silver Proof coins of 19th and 20th century all the time with mirror (Proof) finished .One of the old fashion way to identified Russian Proof coin we can read newspaper reflects in the coin from 3+ centimeters distance . In some cases lower Grade (PF-58) not because mint ” PROOF IMPAIRED” techniques .For example I had previously experience not agree with NGC about one memorial rouble of 19th century .Send to NGC 3 times.1st Grade MS60,2nd-MS61,3rd-PF58 .Coin with light hairlines and old cabinet toning. I’m sure if I removed the toning I could get better grade but it is different case. Finally we find something we are not agree after “short time” collecting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorS Posted April 6, 2014 Report Share Posted April 6, 2014 I am not sure where Haiti and Philippines came from, I was referring to US coins mostly. But be sure - world mints were not working that differently. The technology was simply taken from the leaders in the field, like Boulton in England, who invented modern minting equipment. As you remember Russia bought that equipment too And I still insist - Proof is not a condition of the coin struck with business strike dies, but a result of technological process I described in my prior post. Proof coin is a result of that technological process and cannot become non Proof. As far as NGC grading and giving some grades in MS of PF - it has nothing to do with Proof technology, but simply with subjective opinions of NGC experts, based on their experience. You and me are "old school" - what can NGC teach us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMIS Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 Hi IgorS, As you know for Proof used the same coins as for regular(business ) struck, just brushed special finished . If surfaces was removed ,for example coin accidently get in circulation or cleaned … we can’t say it is Impaired Proof coin if 20% or 10% of the proof coin remain. Possible to described Proof like surfaces remain on the edge or... But I’m not agree with description ” PROOF IMPAIRED” in conditions if surfaces was removed for last couple hundred years no by mint. For example 25 kopecks from Heritage. It is just my opinion Proof, like Frodo's ring can only be unmade by the fires of Mount Doom. ....To completely remove proof surfaces you need to send the coin with some high grade sand paper, or circulate it to about 'fine' grade level. Both scenarios are rather unlikely if you ask me. In any other case, you can always recognize the type of strike of a particular coin. Sometimes one cannot make a decision just by looking at pictures, you need the actual coin to ascertain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 As one may think and have his/her own opinion, I would agree with Igors, that the term PROOF refers to the process by which the coins are made and not to the condition of the coin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 I am not sure where Haiti and Philippines came from, I was referring to US coins mostly. But be sure - world mints were not working that differently. The technology was simply taken from the leaders in the field, like Boulton in England, who invented modern minting equipment. As you remember Russia bought that equipment too And I still insist - Proof is not a condition of the coin struck with business strike dies, but a result of technological process I described in my prior post. Proof coin is a result of that technological process and cannot become non Proof. As far as NGC grading and giving some grades in MS of PF - it has nothing to do with Proof technology, but simply with subjective opinions of NGC experts, based on their experience. You and me are "old school" - what can NGC teach us? Leading Bolton technology was used for Business and Proof .Technological process is different with additional steps and improving product final results for the period of the time in some cases Proof destroyed and hard or not possible to identified . I would be happy if grading company will start grade as you speak and separate PF from MS, but today we have no better competitors in US and finally we have coins graded in MS with different “Technological process”. As you know I newer grade coins from my collection if not decide to sell. Since I started dealing with world coins is different, large number of collectors and dealers around the world buying with conference graded coins and I should see the same way as leading grading company. NGC can reach us only if spend more money for major references and hired Professional in Russian Numismatics "old school" for full time and we both know it is not possible today.One good point I see today they starting collect images in archives.Would be great if in addition add edge images for graded coins . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RARENUM Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 Proof, like Frodo's ring can only be unmade by the fires of Mount Doom. ....To completely remove proof surfaces you need to send the coin with some high grade sand paper, or circulate it to about 'fine' grade level. Both scenarios are rather unlikely if you ask me. In any other case, you can always recognize the type of strike of a particular coin. Sometimes one cannot make a decision just by looking at pictures, you need the actual coin to ascertain. Would be very interesting experience if some body send to grading company without breaking the slab and company change from MS to PF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 IMIS, did you see a coin in person ? Looks like too many "ifs" in your statements, also needs new better photos as well. BTW, welcome to coinpeole ! I missed something from this story, where did you get that info, that EPN had graded his coin as proof ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rain386 Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 On that Heritage link, there is a photo of an envelope where this 1827 25k were. On that was written proof. If someone has time to look, then there were more non.russian EPN coins proof but ngc graded MS. I just thought that long ago they were not so educated to recognize proof from well struck coin:P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted April 8, 2014 Report Share Posted April 8, 2014 It can be a case. Was Mr. Newman aware of Russian 19th century coins in proof - I dont know. Was it him who signed these envelopes - I do not know either. From the picture of 25 kop 1827 available, this coin does not look to me being in proof. NGC might have good reasons do not grade it as a proof, and so on and on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.