The double ear debate

You are gonna have to get some light on the area in question. but it looks like PMD, or the result of circulation.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks I'll get better lighting here is another i have be wondering about ment error or pmd can you please give me your opinion.

 

The attached photo appears to display minor lamination. As for the others, especially if questioning the ear(s), I simply cannot see enough to say for certain. I realize imaging coins is not the easiest thing for someone new, but when it comes to most varieties, proper photos are very important. Perhaps, if you care to try again, try placing your camera on something to ensure there's no movement when taking the photo. Also, be sure to focus as closely as the camera will allow, and be sure to get sufficient light upon the surfaces.

 

Do not use the magnify function on your camera. All editing should be done after the photo has been taken.

 

Well do thank you and so the lamination error you are talking about is it a ment error?

 

Just Pickin here, this is the Philadelphia Mint.

This is a Mint,

What's a ment?

 

the problem with polls is that there is a poll.

 

Something about a 1997 too. That has an ear ache too

 

The 97 has several areas of doubling - I don't know why it isn't more widely accepted as a DD. What's interesting is that the Red Book mistakenly had a picture of a 97 to illustrate the 84 DD for some years (e.g. the 2000 edition, but also some others).

 

Here is the reference from Variety Vista, There are plenty of other pick up points for this DDO. Thanks for the correction.
@Jasper Burns

http://varietyvista.com/01c LC Doubled Dies Vol 3/1997PDDO001 cent.htm