Frosting and Proofs

[Statesman]

Hello, 

A little new to coin collecting, still havn't found that 1933 Penny, LoL. I was originally from the UK, 40 odd years ago, but now living in Oz, and have always wanted to buy some UK coins "that I remember well", so I recently purchased a 1970 Last pre-decimal proof coin set and the first UK Decimal proof set. When I received them both, I was quite disappointed that they didnt have a frosted relief I was expecting.

AS a comparison, I also purchased a 1975 Australian decimal proof set which are frosted on the relief and do look much nicer

Are these UK proof coins really proof as it says on the package or are there differing types of proof coins?

 

Many thanks for any information :-)

Cheers  Chris

Edited March 26, 2018 by Statesman
Speelling

[Paddy]

Welcome Chris!

I am sure someone more knowledgeable will chip in with chapter and verse, but the early Royal Mint proof sets in hard plastic were not frosted. I'm not sure if it was a fixed change over but a quick check back through my sets shows 1979 as un-frosted but 1980 as frosted (though I am not sure all the coins are to the same extent!) Your 1970 is correct at non-frosted and I don't believe there is a frosted version.

There are frosted proofs of some earlier pre-decimal coins, but these are generally very pricey.

I hope that helps.

 

[Statesman]

Hi Paddy, and thanks for your reply. Well thats OK then, as I didnt want to think I might be buying B/UNC coins. Its just that interested folks I show the coins too, the first thing they say is, apart from the obvious different  countries, is that the AU ones look "different" and now I can explain to them that yes, the UK ones ARE proof coins as well, but they are struck (I guess) in a different fashion. Was looking at the Royal Mint pages, but it says very little about the differences in proof coins, that I could see

Thanks again for your time in replying

 

Cheers  Chris

Edited March 26, 2018 by Statesman

[Peckris]

Proof sets were OFFICIALLY frosted from 1980/81 onwards. Before then, the subject is very hazy : some coins in some sets between 1937 and  1970 may have some frosting (generally lighter than official frosting) while some won't have any. 

Your two sets are genuine proofs, but are quite hard to distinguish from the non-proof BU specimen sets sold from 1982 onwards. That mirror finish can even be seen on some decimal currency coins of the 70s. 

[zookeeperz]

1 hour ago, Statesman said:

Hi Paddy, and thanks for your reply. Well thats OK then, as I didnt want to think I might be buying B/UNC coins. Its just that interested folks I show the coins too, the first thing they say is, apart from the obvious different  countries, is that the AU ones look "different" and now I can explain to them that yes, the UK ones ARE proof coins as well, but they are struck (I guess) in a different fashion. Was looking at the Royal Mint pages, but it says very little about the differences in proof coins, that I could see

Thanks again for your time in replying

 

Cheers  Chris

Circulation coins are struck once Proof coins are struck a twice minimum. Generally much sharper detail. If you put your finger near the coin surface but not touching it on proof coins you will see a reflection of your finger comes the term mirrored finish which most proof coins exhibit. I say most because there are different types of proofs. Matt proofs do not exhibit a mirrored finish and are flat to look at but are of such high quality much higher than a standard strike also standard strikes exhibit luster and you cannot get the reflective quality of a genuine proof strike from standard circulation strikes. BU struck coins specifically for sets may exhibit Proof-like qualities and this is where I think the term comes from. People sending in coins from BU sets and getting the PL designation. But as a rule coins struck for circulation are seldom of proof quality Although if you were lucky enough to get the first few coins struck on a new die I dare say they would look far superior to early middle or late stage die strikes. But almost as likely as winning the lottery

As a footnote there are some scarcer types in the 1970 set. the Sixpence has 2 obverse types. the scarcer of the 2 concerns the pointing of I in GRATIA. I>Gap between teeth on border is the scarcer type.

The florin (Two Shillings) also has 2 obverse types the scarcer type has the E of DEI pointing directly to a border tooth

Half Crown has 2 obverse types the slightly scarcer type has the I of GRATIA slightly right of a border tooth.

Half Penny has a rare obverse type D of DEI to GAP and has a thin rim currently Unlisted.

Edited March 26, 2018 by zookeeperz

[Statesman]

Thanks guys for the valuable info. I am now referring to the UK 1971 decimal proof set I also bought. I was reading up on the Chards website https://24carat.co.uk/frame.php?url=1990coinsets.php

I am getting confused in my old age....On the website it says:

"Strangely enough, the fifty pence, although included in the proof set, was not issued for circulation in 1971. It had been introduced in 1969, ahead of decimalisation, and sufficient quantities had been produced dated 1969, and 1970, so that no more were needed in 1971." (My bold)

My set has a 50p dated 1971?

I would have thought that if no more were needed, the set would have a 1969/1970 50p coin in it?

Think I am missing something here

[zookeeperz]

4 minutes ago, Statesman said:

Thanks guys for the valuable info. I am now referring to the UK 1971 decimal proof set I also bought. I was reading up on the Chards website https://24carat.co.uk/frame.php?url=1990coinsets.php

I am getting confused in my old age....On the website it says:

"Strangely enough, the fifty pence, although included in the proof set, was not issued for circulation in 1971. It had been introduced in 1969, ahead of decimalisation, and sufficient quantities had been produced dated 1969, and 1970, so that no more were needed in 1971." (My bold)

My set has a 50p dated 1971?

I would have thought that if no more were needed, the set would have a 1969/1970 50p coin in it?

Think I am missing something here

Inclusion for collectors only to carry on the date cycle or everyone who collects by date would be without a 1971 50 pence

[Statesman]

13 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

BU struck coins specifically for sets may exhibit Proof-like qualities and this is where I think the term comes from.

So there is little to tell the difference between say a BU 1970 penny and a 1970 proof penny?

[zookeeperz]

6 minutes ago, Statesman said:

So there is little to tell the difference between say a BU 1970 penny and a 1970 proof penny?

1970 is only issued as a proof set .  BU sets coins show cartwheel luster when spun in the light . Proof coins do not they are almost the same as looking in the mirror and are far superior in quality

Very informative should answer your questions:)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GiMY-1LHR4

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by zookeeperz

[Statesman]

Ok thanks zookeeperz, think I'm getting the hang of it, lol....My brains a bit fried, as its getting late here. This looks like a FAB website/forum to browse, so glad I found it. Thanks all again!  Cheers Chris

[zookeeperz]

2 minutes ago, Statesman said:

Ok thanks zookeeperz, think I'm getting the hang of it, lol....My brains a bit fried, as its getting late here. This looks like a FAB website/forum to browse, so glad I found it. Thanks all again!  Cheers Chris

No worries any questions or concerns this site has some very knowledgeable folk far mor than I am able to give so there will always be help somewhere and the right help

 

[Statesman]

Thanks for the link, very interesting!  Cheers  Chris

[Peckris]

37 minutes ago, Statesman said:

So there is little to tell the difference between say a BU 1970 penny and a 1970 proof penny?

The last few years' currency coins were all struck dated 1967. The first 10p and 5p coins were dated 1968, then annually thereafter. The first 50p was 1969 (massive issue) and a much smaller issue in 1970. The bronze decimals only became legal tender in 1971 (massive issues).

The Mint struck the 1970 proofs from ?1972 onwards. They must have agonised over the date to use. 1967? Too many currency coins with that date. 1968 or 1969? Possible, but they eventually settled on 1970, being the last year before decimalisation. They are the only proofs of the post-1953 predecimal coins (if you discount the various very rare VIP proofs).

Edited March 26, 2018 by Peckris

[craigy]

3 hours ago, Peckris said:

The last few years' currency coins were all struck dated 1967. The first 10p and 5p coins were dated 1968, then annually thereafter. The first 50p was 1969 (massive issue) and a much smaller issue in 1970. The bronze decimals only became legal tender in 1971 (massive issues).

The Mint struck the 1970 proofs from ?1972 onwards. They must have agonised over the date to use. 1967? Too many currency coins with that date. 1968 or 1969? Possible, but they eventually settled on 1970, being the last year before decimalisation. They are the only proofs of the post-1953 predecimal coins (if you discount the various very rare VIP proofs).

vip proofs that the royal mint wont even comment on,  leave it up to whoever to judge what is vip proof/proof 

[craigy]

i have a several 53 proof half crowns now that show the frosting, seems the rare frosted proof is the one in the plastic set, my latest one,    

[zookeeperz]

58 minutes ago, craigy said:

i have a several 53 proof half crowns now that show the frosting, seems the rare frosted proof is the one in the plastic set, my latest one,    

I think the V.I.P frosted proofs you will never see unless they were relinquished by the MP's that they were given too. I could hardly see them receiving them in a plastic case though?. I would of thought it would have been in a plush veneer casing with something inscribed to honour the occasion . Perhaps we should of asked the RM what were the special V.I.P  sets or coins that were given to heads of states and such like surely they must have pictures somewhere of them.? Also was there a possibility that after they finished the V.I.P quota could those dies of then been used for the normal proof sets? I was under the impression that the frosted proofs look like our modern proofs with that very noticeable snow white  subjects and lettering and almost infinite like dark mirrored finish?

Edited March 26, 2018 by zookeeperz

[craigy]

21 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

I think the V.I.P frosted proofs you will never see unless they were relinquished by the MP's that they were given too. I could hardly see them receiving them in a plastic case though?. I would of thought it would have been in a plush veneer casing with something inscribed to honour the occasion . Perhaps we should of asked the RM what were the special V.I.P  sets or coins that were given to heads of states and such like surely they must have pictures somewhere of them.? Also was there a possibility that after they finished the V.I.P quota could those dies of then been used for the normal proof sets? I was under the impression that the frosted proofs look like our modern proofs with that very noticeable snow white  subjects and lettering and almost infinite like dark mirrored finish?

the royal mint are reluctant to give me a picture of their 1953 vip proof crown as it might not be representative of one ?? whatever that means

 

Dear Mr Cook

 

 

 

I am very sorry for the delay in response to your enquiry, dated 4 August.

 

Frosting is a variable feature of the 1953 proofs. We cannot comment further without seeing the coin you have, but even then it is extremely difficult to identify the so called VIP finish referred to by coin dealers.

 

With this in mind, it may be that any photographic examples we could supply will show a variation of frosting to the type that your pieces display.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely

[zookeeperz]

1 minute ago, craigy said:

the royal mint are reluctant to give me a picture of their 1953 vip proof crown as it might not be representative of one ?? whatever that means

 

Dear Mr Cook

 

 

 

I am very sorry for the delay in response to your enquiry, dated 4 August.

 

Frosting is a variable feature of the 1953 proofs. We cannot comment further without seeing the coin you have, but even then it is extremely difficult to identify the so called VIP finish referred to by coin dealers.

 

With this in mind, it may be that any photographic examples we could supply will show a variation of frosting to the type that your pieces display.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely

So really there are no real V.I.P coins in 1953 ? Only 1951 and the specimen proof-like 1935 crown. It is a terminology designated by dealers and probably as a direct result of the 1951 V.I.P crown as it is the only one listed in literature . Although this gives food for thought There is a V.I.P 1953 penny I don't have the 1953 proof set but on the description it Quotes "reverse has toothed border" I thought they were all beaded and what would a V.I.P proof be doing in a normal Proof set? take a look at this  although the RM told you that they are unable to comment I smell a rat somewhere. Firstly they deflect V.I.P as a dealers  invention to describe a finish on the coins yet their own website shows with the heading V.I.P 1953 Penny. Seems a little contradicting to me don't you think?

https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/443808/elizabeth-ii-v-i-p-proof-penny

[Rob]

All the contradictions are generated by those who wish to have a proof designated VIP because suitably attributed coins would probably see a sudden increase in value. Everyone wants the rare coin rather than being content with a bog standard one - think about the number of people claiming to have a satin proof Churchill. Oddly enough, it is probably easier and cheaper to buy a regular 'VIP' proof from the non-set years, than a wishful thinking 'maybe it is' from 1937 or 1953 etc.

The VIP label was always given as the rationale for the very low mintage proofs. As to where they went? Who knows. The mintage determined the exclusivity and so the phrase was coined.

In the case of the toothed reverse penny, you do have a particularly rare variety, so their VIP attribution could well be a reflection of the people it was made for. The same might possibly be said for the Freeman 465A halfpenny. For an R14 I have seen precious few examples, and the picture on the link above does suggest the rim might be a bit thicker than normal.

[craigy]

so what the hell are the other coins then ?  i have a 53 proof penny which shows that same finish, i know its not clear in that link but i can see it straight away, yeah i'm sure one of them has a toothed border on one side and beaded on the other, not sure if thats a way to tell that its a "vip proof"  there was thread on here that mentioned that variety,   i might send my frosty 53 crown in to the mint museum and see what the beards say,  

[craigy]

found this reference regarding the 37 crowns 

[Peckris]

1 hour ago, craigy said:

so what the hell are the other coins then ?  i have a 53 proof penny which shows that same finish, i know its not clear in that link but i can see it straight away, yeah i'm sure one of them has a toothed border on one side and beaded on the other, not sure if thats a way to tell that its a "vip proof"  there was thread on here that mentioned that variety,   i might send my frosty 53 crown in to the mint museum and see what the beards say,  

A toothed reverse on a 1953 penny is very rare, and is the only way to distinguish a VIP coin from a normal proof. The other coins in the set may well be "VIP" too but there is probably no way to distinguish them from normal proofs. As Rob says, the only sure way to know a VIP is if it's a coin not issued as a 'normal proof' (i.e. dates after 1953).

[Rob]

If you want any more fuel thrown on the fire, my F465A does have a frosted bust.

[zookeeperz]

Long shot  but  factoring in different photography methods . LCA picture(left image) is bound to be enhanced to show the coin at its best. Where as the other coin is just a bulk standard stock picture. Sandblasted proof on the left and what looks like similar coin on the right. Are they both sandblasted? I know there are only a few examples in existence but if the second coin isn't sandblasted why does it look that way. There is no lustre or mirror finish. I cannot see any discernible difference in strike quality what do you think guys?

 

[Peckris]

I don't think the right hand picture is of a sandblasted die. Unlike the one on the left, the finish is very uneven, like an ordinary example that's simply not been cared for properly. You can see bits of the original lustre which couldn't possibly be present on a sandblasted example - you can compare with the even matt finish on the left.