PICKED THIS UP FOR 2.95 ON EBAY BECAUSE I WANTED A Denver to go with my S. im shooting through the cello so if i need to remove it i will. the is another MM to the NW. it isnt shelf like, so it wasnt sure if it was md or not.
Looks clear, as in not a doubled die. May be a shadow. It is a photo. Seeing it in person may be quite different.
whos talking about a DD? im talking about the blatant mintmark to the NW underneath the primary mintmark. you see a clear mintmark?
im sorry. i have this in hand. i got it today. bought it last week on ebay. i didnt take these pics from the auction. i took them.
couple of different angles. no shadows. the bottom mm is slightly to the WNW. it is rounded and not shelf like, and VERY slighty tilted at a different angle than the primary mm.
I'm seeing several images from different angles and lighting. Some show a clear mm and others show what looks to be MD.
i would have said md, but it is like an exact twin to the primary as far as being rounded, and it just looks too perfect.
Up until the mint mark was added to the master die,( various dates for denominations), the mint mark was added to the working die. This coin would come under the manual addition time. Since at least 2 blows were used by the die setter, it was very difficult to get a 100.00% duplication so no variation showed, so the idea of a RPM varied according to visibility and degree of variation, when very low on these 2 scales, arguments were very often. Pricing reflects this along with other factors, such as rarity and condition. From the photos, I personally would not call it a RPM, as I feel if any doubling from the strikes is there, and it probably is on a microscopic scale, it is not enough to qualify and any value for it would be disregarded. For a premium, it should be readily visible with a 5X magnifier and separation apparent. IMO, of course. Jim
