Any Buffs with blast headlight or 5/5 luster? — Welcome to the CAC Educational Forum

Any Buffs with blast headlight or 5/5 luster?

With Lincolns and Jeffs I would call most ms67s a 4/5 on luster but some dates, especially the late 30s for example, can be occasionally found with absolute blast luster or a 5/5. I assume it must be the same with Buffs but are they harder to find? Or do I just not look at Buffs enough in person? Or does the nature of the design taking up most of the coin cause the flashiness to not manifest in a way as to be described as blast or headlights? Anyone have a 5/5 and photo that represents the difference with a typical 4/5? I don't think any of coinfact's photos quite describe the difference. I guess if they exist some of those ms68 38-d's would have to be among them.
«1

Comments

  • That's pretty darn good!
  • Do proof buff’s count? Apparently, this one was struck from new dies, just polished, as the mint was getting ready to resume Proof production after a long hiatus. Any distractions you see are only on the photos and not on the coin in hand. PR67+ w/CAC:





    Steve
  • Sure why not…..another 67+ CAC

  • Do proof buff’s count? Apparently, this one was struck from new dies, just polished, as the mint was getting ready to resume Proof production after a long hiatus. Any distractions you see are only on the photos and not on the coin in hand. PR67+ w/CAC: Steve
    Pretty coin but I think the OP is referring to Mint State coins 
  • That’s why I asked if Proofs count. But other 1936 and later Buffalo proofs I see in high grades don’t have the headlight luster like this coin.

    Steve
  • Proofs weren't meant to be spent ;) . Very nice coins though. If I had unlimited funds I would certainly collect them too.
  • That’s why I asked if Proofs count. But other 1936 and later Buffalo proofs I see in high grades don’t have the headlight luster like this coin.

    Steve

    Looks like a brand new hubcap from the 1950s. Might light paper on fire if angled to the sun properly😉
  • I don't own this coin anymore, but it had impressive luster in hand.

  • Great coin Catbert. I just got a new one in the mail (the 7th ms67 38-d I've owned). Finally I perhaps have a 5/5. Sorry the photo is a bit blurry. I sacrificed detail to show the luster (ie didn't use a tripod).



  • Despite the relentless trashing of TrueViews by comments posted hereon, they offer by far the most realistically beautiful simulation of coins' true appearances.
  • CACfan said:

    Despite the relentless trashing of TrueViews by comments posted hereon, they offer by far the most realistically beautiful simulation of coins' true appearances.

    Completely disagree based on the last two years or so. Color and toning can mis-represent a coin and that is what I am seeing from them. The best photos ever were from Stack’s back before things changed there, say 2010 timeframe. Great Collections photos have also gone downhill in the last few years. They used to be very good. Heritage is still fairly decent, and if nothing else consistent for the most part.
  • I like the details shown and color accuracy of DLRC photos.

    Steve
  • Never understood how a final year of a certain coin die usage would come out so fabulous.

    Any comments?
  • Not white but is loaded with luster, although I failed to capture most of the obverse shine.

  • oreville said:

    Never understood how a final year of a certain coin die usage would come out so fabulous.

    Any comments?

    Die material/alloy and heat treatment?
  • CACfan said:

    Despite the relentless trashing of TrueViews by comments posted hereon, they offer by far the most realistically beautiful simulation of coins' true appearances.

    This is such a joke -"by far the most realistically beautiful simulation of coins' true appearances". I own several coins with TVs that are quite good and several others where the coin is completely or badly represented. I can provide examples, but would prefer not to fill the board up with my evidence. Once again, CACfan boldly and baldly makes these pronouncements that are just not true.
  • Catbert said:

    I don't own this coin anymore, but it had impressive luster in hand.

    Catbert: Fabulous coin. Why does some of the high points particularly on the obverse appear white not toned? As a much younger coin collector I was afraid of such surfaces. Now I know better but still do not know why.
  • What I don’t understand is why in this age of advanced photography for coin images the LUSTER  of a coin cannot be properly displayed. I sent in a few super lustrous coins to GC and their photos do not do Justice to the actual coins super luster. Although their photos of the details of the coins with the images is fairly good. DLRC rarely shows the true luster of their coins. 

    Since luster is arguably almost as important as contact marks there needs to be a photo system that can accurately portray luster on a coin. Paradoxically EBAY dealers often show their coins Luster more accurately, although their are many awful pictures by amateurs on their website.
Sign In or Register to comment.