How much easier is it to identify the desirable doubling from the undesirable, ie a true DDO vs a DDD, having the coin in hand versus a photo. I ask, because so much seems to be based on flatness of the doubled area, but photos are 2 dimensional, so even though those used to seeing photos of these will have a relatively easy time deciding, is it much easier for a novice to see the difference with the coin in hand and a good glass? What led me here was a large bag of wheat cents I've had and have added to for 40+ years, figuring I would one day have plenty of time to look through them....just in time for my eyesight to have declined considerably. Also, what power glass would be best for small cent die variety study? Is there an overhead magnifier that works okay? I've been using my 5x to initially look, and sort out those that show nothing, and then using a 14x hastings triplet for the finer, albeit very small field to study. Also, I'd like to thank those of you who so freely give your time, and share your knowledge. I'm not that old, but old enough to remember when error collecting was very minor, with only the boldest errors making headlines. The Cherry Pickers guide seemed to really start the major change, and the internet, with the incredible error sites maintained has really opened up something major. A highly specialized area, but readily available to all who wish to dive in and learn, which is fantastic for young numismatists who once again can build wonderful collections with pocket change and rolls and bags purchased at their local bank. I have what I believe is a 1957-P DDD...the 7 following the date is kind of a "Ghost Image", but does show a lot of the 7...and it is the only number or letter that shows the doubling, something I thought would be a great asset, until I started reading some of the posts elsewhere, and learned about die deterioration doubling. One day I will get a decent camera for photographing these tiny spots on the coins, and until then will self diagnose until I find someone in New Jersey who knows errors. If anyone has shows they could suggest with a capable error specialist, please send me a message to my inbox with the town the show is in, and I will figure it out. Thanks again, and keep doing a great job spreading the word on the worlds greatest hobby!!!
lol....yes....I always realize that too late. Why I can't watch TV News Stations with soundbites. Always the War and Peace version. Here's an odd one that I assume is purposely made. When I saw it, it reminded me of an old Sheffield plate counterfeit with a hole in the obverse shell so you can see the back of the reverse shell, but if it is of proper weight, it has to be some kind of concoction.
Here's a horrible photo of the coin I think is a DDD....it is somewhat more clear with a magnifying glass, but I tried shooting through the glass with the $21 camera, and it didn't do well....some of the light around the legend letters and numbers is just red where the rest of the coin isn't quite as bright.....it's a raised and rounded bump that follows the 7 very close, but you could see it is at a slightly different angle than the strong punched 7, both the leg and cross part of the 7.
The '57 isn't hub doubling IMO, it's not the same shape as the 7. It's either a hit that pushed up the metal or it could be a die gouge. The 14x should be enough to see doubling, depending on your eyesight of course. And yes there's nothing like seeing them in hand. With some knowledge you'll know right off the bat if it's a true doubled die. As to the shilling, I don't know, that's a strange one.
I think you are right on the shilling. Looks like it was purposefully made to show how the coin is not struck but put together as two halves of a coin. I am betting its not an authentic coin and was made purposefully that way to prove it was made differently.
Several Years ago JT Stanton wrote an article that deals with Doubling of all sorts.. Perhaps now is a good time to share that article again. HERE
Thanks a lot folks! Appreciate the comments and link I will check out. The one things I have to say about that photo though is that the light and toning make it look different than it is...it does follow the shape of the 7 exactly, but it looks a lot like the DDD (die deterioration doubling) I saw photos of, making it pretty much just something to look at. So much better in hand. Also shot that with a flash. Take any coin, and photograph it under a light and have the coin on a book or something on an angle, and take 4 shots with quarter turns. After, reorient the photos so they are all the same, ie obverse, head facing same direction....Crop and resize the photos so they are equal and then put them in a folder and show them as a slide show. Everything moves around. Scratches disappear. (when running the same direction as the light source) But things like the eyes on one will look beady, and the other enormous. Why I don't like using photos, well bad photos anyway. I'm sure there is a way to shoot errors, and it probably involves a ring light, or 3 directional light source. Looking forward to checking out the article!!
Funny, I shared a neat article about errors today with Fred Weinberg whom I've been using as my error "go to" guy for some time. It was nothing major, but just a really cool look at a time when error collecting was nothing compared to what it has become. The collector titled it something like "My freaks and oddities", and it was printed in the November 1947 Numismatist. If I can figure out how to post the short article tomorrow where it is large enough to read, I will. Thanks again!!
Thanks again. Been up for 56 hours and hitting the hay. Seeing double so not good for checking die varieties and errors, but looking forward to reading that article tomorrow. One day will get a decent camera set up, but until then, will try to get multiple angles I see some people do if anything odd comes up. I thought the English coin was definitely fabricated, but have now had 2 tell me it was a fragment piece that wound up causing this. I forget the exact words, but both believed the value to be about 1/4 of the asking price. I think I'll bid it for ha ha's...the thing with non-US coins, be it errors or die varieties, it doesn't seem most other countries are as obsessed with them. I noticed that errors and die variety collecting in the UK is starting to build, but nothing like here. I've owned plenty of major oddball George II and III Irish and English error coins, some obviously made while the mint workers were having fun, but most legit, and the prices were much lower than I would pay for a US coin with the same errors. Maybe it's because their numismatic history dates so much further back, and with a smaller population, the supply/demand ratio is much different than here? Good night!
Jim, That is a good article and I've used it several times. The only one I had some doubts about was the ' Die Polish doubling. It seems that there would be less striation separating the coin from the false doubling, but maybe its the photo Happy New Year, I think I will go visit the old gang
