What is exactly 'lint marks'

[Timofei]

Hi,

 

What is exactly 'lint marks', what's the meaning - I have some troubles with good translation into Russian. Lint marks are particular thing for a proof coin.

[WCO]

Hi,

 

What is exactly 'lint marks', what's the meaning - I have some troubles with good translation into Russian. Lint marks are particular thing for a proof coin.

 

Those are "волокна ветоши". Cloth was used to clean dies, not only on Russian Proofs but on some other coins, like Russian Commemoratives. Occasionally smallest piece of cloth stuck to a die and coin struck with such a die had lint marks. Lint marks are found on Specimen struck coins of many countries, Proofs or not.

 

 

"Lint marks consisted of lines, curlicues, and other depressions in the coin's surface and were made by threads adhering to the die used to strike the piece, residue from an oily rag used to wipe the die".

 

Regards,

 

WCO

[Timofei]

Those are "волокна ветоши". Cloth was used to clean dies, not only on Russian Proofs but on some other coins, like Russian Commemoratives. Occasionally smallest piece of cloth stuck to a die and coin struck with such a die had lint marks. Lint marks are found on Specimen struck coins of many countries, Proofs or not. "Lint marks consisted of lines, curlicues, and other depressions in the coin's surface and were made by threads adhering to the die used to strike the piece, residue from an oily rag used to wipe the die". Regards,WCO

Thnx! Whould that be a 'lint mark'

(this issue is discussed in a Russian forum, so I took a picture from that discussion).

[WCO]

Thnx! Whould that be a 'lint mark'

...

(this issue is discussed in a Russian forum, so I took a picture from that discussion).

 

Lint mark exactly. That guy (KIN) is quite funny, calling them "след волоса".

In reality "lint marks" are "следы от волокон ветоши". They are found on most Specimen strike coins not only on Proofs. Sometimes they are found on regular MS coins too, as soon as working dies were wiped out with cloth. Sad that ТимВик did not know that.

 

WCO

[Timofei]

Lint mark exactly. That guy (KIN) is quite funny, calling them "след волоса".

 

Ok, thanks again for your info. BTW KIN is one of the most serios collectors in Moscow who I know, besides I heard other profound expert sources too about the matter that a lint mark (or hair residue?) is bad thing. In fact I would look deep into different kinds of this feature - maybe (just maybe) there are different types for a fake or original and we cannot mix them up.

 

If anybody can post here pictures of lint marks on Russian coins (proof or specimen) would be a good help indeed.

 

Thank you again, WCO!

[WCO]

Ok, thanks again for your info. BTW KIN is one of the most serios collectors in Moscow who I know, besides I heard other profound expert sources too about the matter that a lint mark (or hair residue?) is bad thing. In fact I would look deep into different kinds of this feature - maybe (just maybe) there are different types for a fake or original and we cannot mix them up.

 

If anybody can post here pictures of lint marks on Russian coins (proof or specimen) would be a good help indeed.

 

Thank you again, WCO!

 

 

U R welcome.

 

I do not know what kind of other marks that are "bad on coins" you are talking about, looks like rumors to me. If you need references on "lint marks" there are plenty. Interestingly enough lint marks found on recently minted dollar struck on experimental planchets, here is the link:

 

http://byersnc.com/expsba.html

 

 

WCO

[grivna1726]

U R welcome.

 

I do not know what kind of other marks that are "bad on coins" you are talking about, looks like rumors to me. If you need references on "lint marks" there are plenty. Interestingly enough lint marks found on recently minted dollar struck on experimental planchets, here is the link:

 

http://byersnc.com/expsba.html

 

 

WCO

 

 

 

 

Another "lint mark" link.

[IgorS]

I read the Russian forum as well (coins.su/forum) and for those who did not, here is a brief of the discussion:

KIN brought up a subject of "lint marks" as means of identifying modern fakes of Russian commemorative coins of 19th and early 20th century.

His message was that if ceramoplasty is used to create dies for striking fake coins, there is a "side effect" during hardening of ceramic dies that creates "lint marks" on the surface of the die, and these "link marks" are transferred onto the coin during striking process. I think the theory is pretty far fetched, but does not sound impossible. So I would like to see more evidence. In the mean time, I have to agree with WCO in that in the picture provided it is a regular lint mark from a thread attached to a die during polishing process.

 

Timofei, another great Avatar! Looks like New York was good to you:)

[WCO]

...

If anybody can post here pictures of lint marks on Russian coins (proof or specimen) would be a good help indeed.

...

 

I have some coins (Russian and world) with lint marks but unfortunately unable to make good pictures of them to show "lint mark" area. Insufficient resolution of my old camera.

 

I even have 1897 gold MS 15 Ruble with a very distinguishable lint mark, which is a scarce event on MS coins.

 

In the meantime I can only post a picture of a rare Specimen coin (not Proof) from Latvia, I hope you will see there is a big "lint mark" on it. It is very well demonstrates that lint marks are found on non Proof coins.

 

http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003001191_1.jpg

 

Lint mark is actually a special kind of "struck through error".

 

WCO

[bobh]

In the meantime I can only post a picture of a rare Specimen coin (not Proof) from Latvia, I hope you will see there is a big "lint mark" on it. It is very well demonstrates that lint marks are found on non Proof coins.

 

http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003001191_1.jpg

 

Lint mark is actually a special kind of "struck through error".

 

WCO

From the picture, this looks like a piece of lint was stuck inside the PCGS holder, not on the coin. It is surprising that such coins with low mintage would pass inspection by the mint when something like this happens. Maybe because it is a pattern, not intended for release? Or does "Specimen" mean something else? (please excuse my ignorance. )

[WCO]

From the picture, this looks like a piece of lint was stuck inside the PCGS holder, not on the coin. It is surprising that such coins with low mintage would pass inspection by the mint when something like this happens. Maybe because it is a pattern, not intended for release? Or does "Specimen" mean something else? (please excuse my ignorance. )

 

I unable to make better picture I made large number of pictures and on most of them it is not visible since in color it is the same as coin, and it is possible to see it on the picture only because it reflects light differently than the surfaces. In reality this mark deeps into metal of coin, as supposed to be. Yes coin is rare and very small amount was struck, still lint mark is there.

 

WCO

[Timofei]

I unable to make better picture I made large number of pictures and on most of them it is not visible since in color it is the same as coin, and it is possible to see it on the picture only because it reflects light differently than the surfaces. In reality this mark deeps into metal of coin, as supposed to be. Yes coin is rare and very small amount was struck, still lint mark is there.

 

WCO

 

 

What we really need is not a specimen coins (which could be a fake, and probably is, btw) but images or reference of old-time collection coins. If and when these marks are present on a Goodman or Fuchs coin we would be able to surely consider them as original.

 

My personal opinion is that when a 'hair residue' like shown on the picture I posted above has such a closed loop (looking like a synthetic textile to me) - the coin is bad. In fact, I think the coin itself is fake as there are other fake-confirming features.

[WCO]

What we really need is not a specimen coins (which could be a fake, and probably is, btw)...

 

That coin is not a fake. Birmingham mint issue, may be confirmed. It seems you do not understand meaning of words "Specimen strike".

 

What we really need ... images or reference of old-time collection coins. If and when these marks are present on a Goodman or Fuchs coin we would be able to surely consider them as original.

 

Enjoy the view. There are several lint marks on this GEM Proof Ruble. http://i01.expertcollector.com/uploads/0003001191_2.jpg

 

... My personal opinion is that when a 'hair residue' like shown on the picture I posted above has such a closed loop (looking like a synthetic textile to me) - the coin is bad. In fact, I think the coin itself is fake as there are other fake-confirming features.

 

We did not see the coin you are talking about, just a small fragment of it, so it is not possible to say that coin is authentic or not. It may be that on some fake coins may be found lines that look like lint marks but have other nature. However, I can easily show coins with authentic lint marks, if you want to prove your point, then show pictures of fakes with this kind of marks. For now we did not see any, just a "fairy tale" that they exist.

 

WCO

[Timofei]

However, I can easily show coins with authentic lint marks, if you want to prove your point, then show pictures of fakes with this kind of marks. For now we did not see any, just a "fairy tale" that they exist.

WCO

 

Please show more if that is easy, I would appreciate. From my side it is not easy to obtain a picture of fake coin, but will do if possible. One is shown above.

 

As to what I do or do not understand about meaning - let us leave aside ok? We saw NUMEROUS Brussels specimens of Ni coins (which 99% are fake of 1940-s), as well as strange proof like Birmingham specimens of 1800-s (which are very cheap and too plenty for being a dozen pieces set). So a specimen coin is a thing itself, and I would like to collect images of conmems and possible not proofs of 19th cent.

[WCO]

Please show more if that is easy, I would appreciate. From my side it is not easy to obtain a picture of fake coin, but will do if possible. One is shown above.

 

As to what I do or do not understand about meaning - let us leave aside ok? We saw NUMEROUS Brussels specimens of Ni coins (which 99% are fake of 1940-s), as well as strange proof like Birmingham specimens of 1800-s (which are very cheap and too plenty for being a dozen pieces set). So a specimen coin is a thing itself, and I would like to collect images of conmems and possible not proofs of 19th cent.

 

OK, I will leave concept of Specimen Strike then, I hope you read it yourself one day and realize that some Russian coins with some degree of accuracy in fact are Specimen Strikes. And with this in mind you realize that they may have lint marks on them just because of technology used at that time to make this kind of coins.

 

Yes, I have a few more coins with lint marks and someone could make pictures of them, and it is easy since coins are available. It is not easy for me since my camera have insufficient resolution to make good pictures of those places where you can actually see the marks well.

 

But there is little point in making those pictures, most advanced collectors and dealers are well aware about existence of lint marks, there is plenty to read online about it too. There is no any info (to the best of my knowledge) about similarly looking things on fake coins, so it seems for me that it is your turn to show the pictures of fake coins with marks similar to lint marks. And that fragment of a coin that we saw is insufficient to tell if that coin is authentic or not. And it would be interesting how many people will be able to even identify that coin.

 

WCO

[Timofei]

I hope you read it yourself one day and realize that some Russian coins with some degree of accuracy in fact are Specimen Strikes.

 

 

Yes, yes, very informative, thank you.

[WCO]

You are welcome

 

WCO

[grivna1726]

And that fragment of a coin that we saw is insufficient to tell if that coin is authentic or not. And it would be interesting how many people will be able to even identify that coin.

 

WCO

 

 

I can't identify it and I am curious to know what it is.

 

Please either post a picture showing the whole coin, or tell me what it is.

 

Thanks!

[IgorS]

I can't identify it and I am curious to know what it is.

 

Please either post a picture showing the whole coin, or tell me what it is.

 

Thanks!

 

I do not know what it is either. Commemoratives with plane edges are 1841 (medal), 1859 and 1883. The fragment is from neither one. The edge in the fragment looks kind of rough, so my guess is that we are looking at a fragment of a medal, not a coin.

[grivna1726]

I do not know what it is either. Commemoratives with plane edges are 1841 (medal), 1859 and 1883. The fragment is from neither one. The edge in the fragment looks kind of rough, so my guess is that we are looking at a fragment of a medal, not a coin.

 

 

That certainly sounds reasonable to me. The fact that you don't recognize the coin/medal either leaves me feeling a little less stupid.

 

I look forward to learning the answer.

[Timofei]

That certainly sounds reasonable to me. The fact that you don't recognize the coin/medal either leaves me feeling a little less stupid.

 

I look forward to learning the answer.

 

Guys, I am sure you wonder what it is, I am sorry, but I cannot disclose the complete details other than given above - this is not in my possesion and there are some other issues involved about this item which are being resolved at the moment. If and when I will be able to give full details in public forum, with the owner's permission I will do so. I hope you understand this as we all may be sometimes in same uncertain situation.

[grivna1726]

Guys, I am sure you wonder what it is, I am sorry, but I cannot disclose the complete details other than given above - this is not in my possesion and there are some other issues involved about this item which are being resolved at the moment. If and when I will be able to give full details in public forum, with the owner's permission I will do so. I hope you understand this as we all may be sometimes in same uncertain situation.

 

 

I don't really understand the problem with showing a picture of the entire coin or medal but accept your statement that there is one.

 

That is a wonderful Catherine II portrait coin that you are using as your avatar. Is it yours or, as in my case, just one that you wish you owned?

[Timofei]

I don't really understand the problem with showing a picture of the entire coin or medal but accept your statement that there is one.

 

That is a wonderful Catherine II portrait coin that you are using as your avatar. Is it yours or, as in my case, just one that you wish you owned?

 

I never use "want to have" images; these are all from my collection. Any guess about what this copper is?

[grivna1726]

I never use "want to have" images; these are all from my collection. Any guess about what this copper is?

 

 

Wow! Then you must have a very impressive collection!

 

I had wondered about the color and thought that it was just very deeply toned silver or else that the color balance of the picture was off.

 

Without consulting my books, I do not know of any copper portrait coins of Catherine II. It does not look like a medal (the fields and relief look more like a coin). So my guess is that it is either

 

(1) a novodel struck in copper "to make it more interesting" or

 

(2) an off-metal strike made as a pattern or a die trial or

 

(3) dies engraved by an apprentice engraver or

 

(4) a contemporary counterfeit.

 

 

Of these possibilities, the die work seems too good for #4. It could be #1, but my guess is that it is either #2 or #3 based on the superb state of preservation and high quality die engraving, more likely #2.

 

Am I right?

[Timofei]

This is conmemorative jeton: a copper novodel of very rare gold jetton dedicated to court circus festival (by V. Bitkin) or court roller-coaster

 

What is interesting about this piece is that according to pre-1917 sources original jeton was made in gold and silver and in 2 varietes (all are very rare). Original jeton beared the date of June 16, 1766 - date of the event. However there is a complete series of novodel jetons, which are distinguished by error date - July 11, 1766 (!) On top of that - this is a novodel which most probably was minted in 18 century (it is completely different to 19 cent copper novodels, which are not rare). Portrait die is apparently from the gold coin. This jetton is in circulated condition which is also strange thing for a novodel.