Hey don't give up. This site is full of knowledge and eventually when you do find one someone will be able to tell you that it is indeed the real deal.
There is no 'real ' doubling, but unless it is the photo/light, there might be some mechanical doubling ( which is usually of no value ). If you see a cent of this era, before the 'Single squeeze ' era , where it appears to be doubled, but the two images of a portion of a letter or number, together only has the thickness of normal, it is machine doubling. Hub or true doubling is human error and the 2 portions will be thicker than normal. Hope this helps.
It often takes time, Mickey, so have patience. Cents from the late 70s into the 80s can be tough anyway. If new to searching, there are many very minor DDRs (or should I say what is considered to be them) on the columns of late memorial cents. As examples, @tommyc03 has posted a few he's recently found. The more familiar you become, the easier it will be to spot varieties.
If you are still with us Mickey, please don't give up. Errors are a specialty all on their own and come in all shapes and sizes. Lincolns are a good starting point for anyone as they are still very much available in pocket change and bank rolls. And although most will be the minor errors eventually you may come across a big one. They are still out there. What Books says about patience is so very true with these. The minor doubling on the columns of the cents from 1998-2006 can sometimes be difficult to spot, especially if the coins are new(er). They mostly lay flat against the left or right column in the statue bay on the reverse, sometimes very tiny, others are more pronounced. I have found hundreds of these in the past few years. You won't get rich off these like the major errors but they help you to train your eyes for the better ones.
I wasn't aware of any small date 1983. You can look at almost any coin with a microscope and find some irregularities. That doesn't make it a valuable variety.
Like a large number of people who post here, you need better pix. Is the 1982 D small date you posted the other day, copper? I don't recall that being clarified.
I'm not aware of one either but there were some sloppy coins that appeared blobish in some cases due to plating issues. That may lend some confusion to this year.
It does have the "8" used for the previous year small date variant........I haven't looked to see if any other 83's use the large date "8". edit........... just peeked at 40 83 pennies, all had the small date "8" from the 82 small date variants.
That and playing with the thermal induction into bimetal and low melting-temp planchets while they were playing with single-squeeze, trying to get the surface geometry on the dies right without Katia, Pro-E etc and manual machining only, through times with murky and vague documentation.... probably answers quite a few questions most will never ask.
