Early Commemoratives

Dude your killing me! :headbang: I actually used a tip to get the pics that I did... I took the picsTHROUGH my loupe. Worked awesome! You know the pic that shows "camera doubling", well, that one was not through the loupe, but close zoom. Each time I got the same result... photo doubling. Then I took the pic through the loupe and got some awesome pics. Last night I thought I might have had a D/D/D, but clearly it is a D/D. Went to my local coin shop today and told them about it. Looked at the one they had in the display but was nothing like mine. They told me to bring it in tomorrow so they could look at it.
Thanks for looking HT!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm working on a Dansco...10 to go.

 

Well I clearly see the D/D while the lettering on the coin looks like machine doubling to me, but certainly not that mint mark. That is a cool coin. I personally like looking at the older commemoratives, but not collecting them. So you all can always post pictures - I do like seeing them even though I can not grade them.

 

Thanks Mark - Yes there is some slight machine doubling on the coin. I think HT was hinting at this in his post. I'm no expert, but that is a D/D if I ever saw one. Now I would like to know how it got there. At different angles, I swear I see the top of an "s" above the D mintmark, but I think my eyes and the reflection of the metal is playing tricks with me.... but you never know. From what I understand the 36S was first minted and when they didn't sell well, many were melted down and the 36D was minted so I doubt it is a D/S - but still can't explain the D/D.

 

Ok - Went surfing on NGC to see if any varieties have been attributed to the San Diego Commem. It doesn't appear that any have been found. This link shows a hand full of known varieties that NGC has graded in the commem series - http://www.ngccoin.com/VPSubCategory.aspx?subid=5 I think I am reading this page correctly. If not let me know.

 

And this link as well. http://www.ngccoin.com/CoinDetail.aspx?ContentID=187&Page=1 This link gives a great detailed history of the San Diego Commem. I find the histories of the early commems facinating since they tend to be a little more colorful than their modern counterparts.

 

I agree. That history is what I was trying to get others to explore in my recent contest.

 

Cool Shuckins! Which ones are left?

 

a couple of tough ones:
antietam,gettysburg,hawaiian,hudson,missouri,monroe,norfolk,spanish trail,vancouver,lafayette

 

Hobo, unfortuately I just saw your contest thread the other day when I was searching about the early commems. Had I only known - I have found some good ones! I actually ran out to my local bookshop and bought the book right after it was released. I believe it was you that mentioned it to everyone about the release of the book. I love it - I have learned so much from the Whitman series of books.

 

For the life of me, I can't see any of the doubling you're speaking of....except the camera doubling Boy would THAT be a great coin to own

Could someone point out what they see as diagnostics of the doubling? Perhaps some 'telestration on Jaceravone's pix?

 

Thems are the toughies. What grade range are you trying to find them in?

 

Here is an update of what I found out at the coin shop. I had 4 guys look at it, all of them have a heck more experience than I do - nearly 150 years experience combined. Oh boy, did the books come out. The coin shop had books stashed away that were older than I was! Dust was flying everywhere! Nothing was found about any errors or varieties with this issue. Everyone was intrigued. All the guys immediately saw what I had originally thought in my first post about this coin - possible triple struck. They also confirmed another suspiscion of mine that it looked like a D/D/S - or possibly a D/D/D but that was a little tougher to verify. All definitely agreed that it was definitely a D/D. The assitant manager of the shop said that it was probably a restruck mintmark, but not a double die. They had one of these coins for sale in their shop. The mintmark was much cleaner than mine, but still appeared to have something going on with the mintmark - possibly another restrike. All agreed that I should send it in, and as mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I plan on submitting this to NGC as soon as my membership package comes in.

On another note, some of you may remember my post last week about my excitement about the coins on our local bid board - the Wisconsin and Roanoke that were in beautiful condition. Well, I didn't win those. I couldn't get out of work and I had the wrong number of the coin shop to call in any increased bids. This week they have a Alabama and Gettysburg on the bid board. Not as nice as last weeks, but still UNC. Hopefully, if I win these, I will post pics this Tuesday.

 

Did they note any other doubling going down?

Ribbit

 

Do you mean else where on the coin or below the "D"?

 

Elsewhere's! The portions I wanted you to take more photos of?

Ribbit

 

There was no other doubling on the coin. That was the first thing they looked for if there was any doubling anywhere else. If there were, then I may have had a double die, but since there wasn't any, the conclusion was a re-punched mint-mark. The doubling that you saw in the photos was from either a slight blurring of the pics and/or some very slight mechanical doubling. I can still take the pics if you want. Just let me know.

Also, if you look at my original pics - you will see a tail that looks like it coming from an "S" on the left lower part of the mint-mark. It is much more pronounced when holding the coin in hand and kind of difficult to photograph it, but it does show up a little in the original pics.

 

I don't understand what they mean by 'restruck' and 'restrike'. 'Restrike', when talking about coins, is generally a coin that is struck from the original dies at a later date.

Do they mean the mint mark had machine doubling or do they mean the mint mark was double punched?

 

Nah! If they looked with it in-hand, that's good enough for me. I wondered it it was glare and not doubling I saw. :kewl:

The date is for sure a doubling and I look forward to seeing it in a slab.

Ribbit

 

Yes I meant re-punched! Sorry, my bad. I caught myself in my last post to say re-punched and not re-struck. Once I saw that, I knew someone would catch my typo.