1887, proof 7 coin set, jubilee head

[pedro11]

Hi All, this is my initial post and I would like it to go well lol.

I purchased a proof set of the above some time ago , but from photos taken by my mobile a Numastisist has told me it is a currency set, and a coin dealer says it is likely they are currency, neither having seen them in the flesh. What defines currency set ? and how do you tell that an 1887 coin set is proof ?

How would an 1887 proof look in 2018 ? Help. 

[Nick]

1 hour ago, pedro11 said:

How would an 1887 proof look in 2018 ? Help. 

A lot of 1887 proofs have a slightly purple hue, but all coins tone differently depending how they have been stored.  Most proofs can be identified by the reflective fields, well defined rims and edge and sharply defined edge milling.

If you can post a decent picture, you'll get an answer.

[Nick]

As an example, here is a picture of two 1887 florins (left currency, right proof).

 

[Peter]

Must say the currency is more appealing.In fact the proof is a bit of a munter.

[Nick]

10 minutes ago, Peter said:

Must say the currency is more appealing.In fact the proof is a bit of a munter.

In the photo perhaps, but not in the hand.

[rpeddie]

add mine to the mix, look for sharp jaggy edges/milling thats how i tend to tell 

[ozjohn]

3 hours ago, Nick said:

As an example, here is a picture of two 1887 florins (left currency, right proof).

 

Ghosting on the currency issue? Can't say I've seen that on Jubilee coins before.

Edited December 12, 2018 by ozjohn
Typo

[Sword]

2 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

Ghosting on the currency issue. Can't say I've seen that on Jubilee coins before.

The JH portrait is surely too shallow cut for ghosting? Might be just some unlikely toning?

[Nick]

4 minutes ago, Sword said:

The JH portrait is surely too shallow cut for ghosting? Might be just some unlikely toning?

I don't have that coin any longer, so can't check.

[pedro11]

Thanks Guys, it looks quite different does anyone know the different values for the different coin sets ? and is specimen the same as proof?

[Sword]

59 minutes ago, pedro11 said:

Thanks Guys, it looks quite different does anyone know the different values for the different coin sets ? and is specimen the same as proof?

The difference in price is huge. A decent 1887 proof crown can cost £2000 and a decent UNC currency crown might cost two or three hundred pounds. The word "specimen" is often printed on unofficial boxes and is not helpful in this case. For 1887, it is either proof or currency.

[Peckris 2]

On 12 December 2018 at 6:28 PM, Peter said:

Must say the currency is more appealing.In fact the proof is a bit of a munter.

Interesting. I thought the opposite - the proof has some lovely toning.

On 13 December 2018 at 4:45 PM, pedro11 said:

Thanks Guys, it looks quite different does anyone know the different values for the different coin sets ? and is specimen the same as proof?

For 1887 the difference is colossal - the proofs would rate at thousands where you'd be lucky to get a couple of hundred for the currency, they're so common. Obviously the situation would be different for other sets - e.g. 1902 where the silver proofs would be no more than double the currency.

[Benny who]

Proofs for the 1887 sets have perfectly formed teeth around the edge,basically if your had cogs engineered,they would look the same as these,the normal 1887 are more rounded.

If it has SPECIMEN don't trust that it is,as these sometimes can be a mixture of some or none. 

[jasonsewell]

On 12/12/2018 at 6:28 PM, Peter said:

Must say the currency is more appealing.In fact the proof is a bit of a munter.

Got to say I quite like the look of the proof