I haven't found anything about one of these, but it sure looks like a D over D. What do you guys think?
Looks like a D/D to me. I know nothing about these really, but just based on your photos I can't see what else it would be. This looks close: Variety Vista (south variation)
Cool find, BTW. Check this out: Link Here Might help you figure out Die Stage. Try some better lighting on the coin if possible and get a close up of that area. This one seems a little closer to yours, but need better pics.
General comment: by posting full pictures of the obverse/reverse it makes attribution much easier. This one had a terrific marker to look for, but others can be more difficult. I should also note that when folks feel they have the correct attribution but are looking for validation, they should also mimic the photos offered at the various sites where markers are located. All part of the diagnostic process. Terrific find!!
I've never agreed with the folks who insist on seeing full-coin pics of obverse and reverse, since the resolution of those is almost never good enough to see die markers for attribution and stage identification. However, I do agree that photos of the individual markers is always useful. It all comes down to how folks view their coins. Many of us have the advantage of searching for varieties with a stereo microscope, so we can search many coins quickly and identify markers and such directly. Some folks use a high power loupe, but that method seems be giving way to high power USB microscopes, which tends to make the process pretty slow and tedious.
I use both. I do the quick search with a magnifying lamp and loupe but have the stereoscope adjacent for the finer details. What often happens here is that posters put up shots of a date/mm but nothing else to assess attribution. This is sometimes made more difficult by circulation damage, die stage, and for some dates, a plethora of similar positions and locations. Many times the answer is found in the general and specific photos that members ask for later. It is also why I prefer Coppercoins over Wexler and VV for cents, albeit that all are necessary especially when one lists and the other doesn’t. Many members also over magnify photos creating out of focus or pixelated images. The full obverse and reverse photos, while not immune, are generally better in these regards. Many seasoned variety hunters can attribute a number of specimens this way. But to each their own. The process usually plays out either way.
I haven't used a loupe for searching for varieties since I got the stereoscope back in the early 90's. The stereoscope is so far superior both optically and ergonomically that I shudder to think of looking through rolls of coins with a loupe. Yes, we have a lot of newbies, and even experienced folks, who don't yet understand the process for attributing coins. It might be good to write a simple procedure, and publish it as a standard reply to the folks who seem like they are serious about learning how to attribute their varieties. In my mind this forum, plus other similar ones where folks are looking at varieties, should be mostly about education. That said, the date/mm is indeed the first thing to look for to attribute an RPM, and often is all that is needed at the outset. More sophisticated searchers might go further and identify the stage, but with circulated examples that is often more difficult. This is why I rail against asking folks to post full coin images, since if you can't tell from the date/mm pic (I call it the "money shot") if the coin is an RPM, having full coin images isn't going to help in 99% of cases.
