Jarden Zinc Video on copper plating process. (Includes Burnishing for other Denoms)

If it doesn't fit anywhere else, POST IT HERE. Numismatic related posts only.

Moderator: Daniel

Message
Author
PetesPockets55
Forum Supporter
Forum Supporter
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:08 pm
Has thanked: 20 times

Re: Jarden Zinc Video on copper plating process. (Includes Burnishing for other Denoms)

#11 Unread post by PetesPockets55 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:47 am

PALH1 wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:21 pm
Cliff, don't try to over think this, or make it TOO COMPLICATED,... Because it is very complicated already.
:eureka:
If I were to classify it, I would say that all would fall into just 2 categories:
"mint processing errors", and "die errors",...
... Where the 'Die Error', would be called the "Variety", and the 'Mint Processing Error', would be called the "Variety", and the 'Mint Processing Error', would be called a "Mint Error".

BUT THAT'S JUST ME :w


Thanks Paul and I totally agree. I'm just trying to reconcile what I thought I remember lately with what is the accepted understanding.

Daniel wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:52 pm
Strike doubling or mechanical doubling is an error or minting variety and it is erroneous to call it machine damage since by that definition anything that goes wrong in the coining chamber would be damage.

Calling strike doubling damage was a weak attempt by certain experts to stop people from confusing them with doubled dies. Just a lazy method of down-playing the mechanical doubling. However mechanical doubling is just as much an error as a double strike, strike through or capped die among the others. It is just that it's hated more because of the confusion it causes and the more dramatic minting varieties are more desirable.

Like I said, the coin is THE canvas and anything that happens to a coin that shouldn't is a mint error or minting variety. We don't classify them as a variety when it happens during the planchet division or striking division, but all of it is something accidental to the coin.


Thanks Daniel. That clarifies my understanding about mechanical doubling actually being an error, albeit non-valuable (and definitely hated). And I understand the need to separate it from doubled dies.

I truly appreciate you taking the time and energy to follow up with this reply. It helps me immensely.

mhonzell wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:33 pm
Variety: reproducible by die strike.
Error: anything else that results in less than perfect coin leaving the mint


This doesn't mean that an error has any value.

Thanks Mark. Point well taken, especially added to all the above.
I lost site of the fact that not all errors are valuable.



Thanks guys because I am sure others with even less experience have probably had the same confusion and by asking and replying it has helped them as well. :yourock:



User avatar
Daniel
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 12806
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:59 pm
Location: Ohio
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times
Contact:

Re: Jarden Zinc Video on copper plating process. (Includes Burnishing for other Denoms)

#12 Unread post by Daniel » Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:32 am

In addition, all are mint errors but once multiple examples of the same are discovered then it can become a variety and the only way that can occur is if it is struck by a die with the that error.

However, when the mint purposely changes the design as in mint mark for 1979 or 1981 or added chain mail over the breast on a Standing Quarter that is a Type as in 1 or 2. It is not accidental and would not be a mistake.

Post Reply