Matt Finish

[lucky2]

I hate to sound Dumb but sometimes I feel that way. What is the cause of the Matt Finish on Coins. Is it new Dies? It looks more like refinishing (sand blasting) hubs. All the type appears to be lower and very flat but this could be just a lower pressure strike of the Blank. Are the Blanks finished differently in some cases and not others.? Thanks ~lucky2

[Robert]

Though I think it's spelled "matte", your hunch is correct. They "sandblast" or acid pickle all or part of the working dies.

Modern "frosted" proof coins are done that way. The deepest parts of the die (corresponding with the raised portions of the coin) are sandblasted/pickled. Then the high points on the die (corresponding to the field on the coin) are severely polished. The result is a proof coin with "frosty" details but a glossy, mirror-like background.


http://www.pcgs.com/lingo.chtml?universeid=313&letter=M

[lucky2]

Robert thanks for the information but why is this done on business strikes or am I getting the benifit of proof dies used for business strikes on 2003 Lincolns.~lucky2

[coppercoins]

I don't think any of the business strike dies are matte finished - they might just appear that way. Often times newer dies tend to look like that just by chance, and older dies that have developed heavy flow lines can also look matte finished.

It is my understanding that the matte finish, technically, is only used for certain special strikes.

[lucky2]

Welcome back Charles. I hope you had a good trip.
My concern or comments are centered around a new roll of 2003D cents I picked up at a show Saturday. I have only looked at about 20 coins. All have a matte finish and many show wide flat low relief letters in some areas around the coin. Although most people would not see what I have sees and the rest would would laugh at what I have found, I seem to see doubleing on the Obverse and the reverse of many of these coins. If I can take a moment to speculate probably just for my own amusement, what if the Mint created several dies with their single impression method and later found that due to die movement dies created showed doubleing. Although minor someone at the mint knows we variety collectors would have a field day. What to do? I suggest they sanded the surface in some areas which removed a lot of the obvious doubleing and then sand blasted the dies in an attempt to hide doubleing on the tops of the letters. If this was the way it was done for the most part it worked but under a 30 power scope I can still find reminants of doubleing. This is my story and my find and I will stick with it atleast as long as it takes someone to shoot it full of holes.I can not get new coins as a rule so for all I know all of them have a matte finish. I guess I will know about 5 minutes after I post this. ~lucky2

[coppercoins]

I have to revert back to the old dreaded statement, "I'd have to see it to take a guess." I have seen a lot of coins of late with apparently thicker devices that were simply the result of lighter strike not causing the full bevel of the devices to show, which would make them look fatter. I have also seen a number of different surface appearances on some of the newer coins, which could look like a matte finish.

My best suggestion is to take a really close look at some of the coins intentionally struck with matte finishes and compare them closely to what you are seeing. My bet is that you will notice a difference, but I cannot be absolutely certain of that. You may have something, but it's not something I can pass judgement on either way until I get some coins in hand to study up close.

As an addition to the subject, I have noticed for years now that some of the business strike cents from the 1962-1965 era have what appears to be remnants of the frosted cameo from a proof on Lincoln's bust on the obverse. How was this caused? Possibly by sanding and reusing proof dies, but I cannot be certain of that without a lot of coins and many hours of study to find a proof and business strike coin pair that have the same pitting on the bust....the exact same pitting. This would prove the two were struck with the same die. Perhaps what you are seeing is in some way related to what I have noticed on the older coins. No telling from my vantage point without seeing them up close.