Is This a 1914d?

Thanks for the input. In your opinion, are there four or five positions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hint; I made my pictures 500 pixles from the first 1 to the tail of the 4. All you have to do is crop the image in question align the date horizontal and than size it to 500.

 

5

 

Of course that's the problem, as mentioned...

 

IMO, real close only counts if you're dodging a bullet or spreading misinformation. Perhaps, someone may wish to post a new thread about making an overlay from photos on the internet taken with different magnification, lighting, surface and grade.

You want to do a study?

1. Find four (or five?) Uncirculated 14-D cents with different mint mark locations.
2. Photograph the date area with the exact same magnification and lighting.
3. Overlay the photo negatives. (I'm showing my age and how it was originally determined there are ONLY four positions.)

PS I really do have an open mind and I will eat humble pie and blast my instructor if there actually are five.

 

I really do not think you need all of that, but if it floats your boat.

As for your comments about "close". See if this sounds better to you. The OP picture is too fuzzy to tell anything for sure. He needs a better picture. Believe me, I was saying no more save that it would be worth the effort to get a sharper picture.

 

Here is what does not "float."

If folks start taking photos off the internet with circulated, damaged, and smashed mint marks or those on coins struck with worn dies, they are going to start claiming TWENTY mint mark positions on these coins!

 

I am not going to get into a ^@^&@ contest with you, but I guarantee you that for a coin with minimal dies, I can absolutely match a smashed worn coin to the proper die. Just as an example, how do you think they identify 1922 plain cents. There are 4 dies and the vast majority of them are severely smashed, badly worn and on worn out dies. Yet somehow they are relatively easy to identify.

 

I'm soooooooooo glad you did not start a ^@^&@ (Serious question as I'm computer illiterate: does this mean something or is it like *<#%>)? This thread is becoming very educational. I'm just questioning what to me is misinformation from a "phantom" thread by "phantom" posters that SO FAR cannot be proven to be correct by any useful evidence.

Concerning your post: How true. And I'll remind you that the reason you are able to do what you have posted above in #28 is because these particular coins (1922-D and 1922 Plain Lincoln cents) have been studied extensively since 1970 something.

Results of this research by well known professional authenticators has been published at least twice in the Numismatist magazine and by other authors in various places. I'll also remind you that standards for authenticating these coins CHANGED several times in the past at different authentication services UNTIL one standard for distinguishing 1922 Plain cents became set in stone.

Now, I was unaware, shocked, and disappointed, that two, well known for decades, noted professional numismatists I consulted yesterday (one who actually helped do the original research on 1922 Lincolns while an authenticator at ANACS) had NO CLUE how many mint mark positions are on 1914-D cents. I learned decades ago in the same time period that there were ONLY four! Guess I should apply for a job at a TPGS .

The reason I will continue to say four positions is there is no information that I can find that is published contradicting what I learned. Stay tuned as I am reaching out to other TPGS professionals.

 

Let me ask a slightly different question. If my pictures actually show 5 different dies and the professionals say there are only 4, who is right? Remember the "micro o" Morgans?

 

The original images you started w/are not at the same magnification so any manipulation you do will not correct that. Now, since I am ignorant when it comes to photography...what the heck do I know!

 

You are starting with a FALSE PREMISE. IMHO, your pictures show only four positions. Two are identical.

Now as for professionals. Apples & Oranges: The "Micro O" dollars have nothing to do with this thread. That was a case of counterfeit coins (mostly circulated) getting past collector/numismatists who included them in the VAM Book. To the best of my knowledge based on written articles, Michael Fazzari (a long-time professional authenticator) condemned the first one he ever saw (it was an AU) around 1994 while employed at PCI.

NOTE OF INTEREST: I was told that the coin was certified as genuine and put in a PCI "Signature Series" slab by a well respected, knowledgeable, Morgan dollar expert (over Fazzari's objections).

It took the professionals at other grading services (NCG was first to stop slabbing these around 1998 or 1999 after Fazzari was hired and convinced them the coins were bad), until years later to declare the coins
contemporary counterfeits.

As to the 1914-D mint mark positions. I have written that I am shocked that the two well regarded professional authenticators I contacted were not able to confirm yesterday what was taught at an ANA Summer Seminar authentication class in the early 1970's: Four positions. That makes your point: It looks like well respected, informed, experienced professional authenticators do not know how many positions there are!

 

And I believe your 4 positions is a "FALSE PREMISE". Problem is, that just accomplished nothing. And other than posting a picture, I cannot debate your side even if you find a "professional" who supports your position except by showing a fifth position which I believe I have done. So, IMO, unless and until you show me that 2 of those pictures are the same die, there are 5 dies.

My point with the micro "O"'s was simple and you just buttressed my point. i.e. your TPG professionals do make mistakes. They are not perfect!

 

magnification is immaterial. 500 pixels is 500 pixels regardless of how it started. Rotations is also easy to fix. Now angles can cause a problem. It is possible to correct even those, but I would not trust my accuracy. Others with more experience can easily do it.

Just as an example using http://coins.ha.com/itm/lincoln-cen...-3091.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515;
original;

smaller

detail;

rotated 60°

 

Well, we'll just need to disagree . I have actually seen the 4 plotted positions on red uncirculated 1914-D Lincoln cents. They were all photographed using the same magnification and lighting. Overlays were made using negatives. That was good enough for the authenticators at ANACS in the early 1970's and that was taught in authentication classes.

Unfortunately, I guess that was just a case of some diagnostic information not being transferred/taught to the rookie crew that took over ANACS after the move to Colorado in late 1970's. Fortunately, by the mid 1980's with some staff additions, ANA had a great group of professionals working there. That's why I am astounded that (what I thought was common knowledge) no info on 14-D's is available in books or online.

I still plan to call the guys at the modern ANACS. As far as I know a fifth position has not been discovered by anyone (except you - congratulations!) in over forty years.

See, I can play fair...I agreed with you and provided evidence to confirm your opinion when it was correct: professional authenticators can make mistakes.

 

@rlm's cents

Update: No one at ANACS or NGC has done a study on these. I have.
Anyway, I guarantee you and I have created a big shake up among the professionals. I'm also pretty sure that a very well known authority on rare die varieties & counterfeit detection I consulted earlier is also very curious to find the answer.

 

That blows me away that no one has studied that yet, but that is what they said at LRF. That is why someone studied their positions.

 

Too bad you cannot find the thread.

@medoraman Start at the original post on page one. This is an amazing turn of events.

 

http://www.lincolncentforum.com/forum/showthread.php?21328-1914-D-dies&highlight=1914-d

 

I'm having trouble seeing the jesus. Could you point it out?