Am I crazy, or is there doubling clear on the 6 and the S? Also on Liberty I can see a bit as well, but not as clear. Sorry about the photos. The one of the date was taken through my loupe.
Here are photos of a 1969-S Doubled Die Cent from our friends at Heritage Auctions. As you can see, ALL of the letters are doubled, not just the date and mint mark area.
Yes, I understand that this variety normally (or always?) has doubling everywhere. However, it’s clear to me that there is doubling here. So, just a MD error?
The "doubled area" is flat and not rounded; it's flat. Therefore it is machine doubling. Like it or not, collectors don't pay a premium for that.
I see it also in the E and R of Liberty, just could get a good pic of it. Those also look flat. So, I guess MD is the right call. Thanks, guys.
Furry Frog, I didn't say it IS. I was asking for opinions on it and got some that were helpful. I'm fairly new to this hobby and wasn't trying to pass of something that it ISN'T. There is clear doubling. The rounding vs flat delineation I did not know. Thanks
You didn't understand what I meant. Perhaps that was my bad for not explaining correctly. When it comes to a doubled die vs one you think is "questionable", it either is the doubled die or it isn't. A lot of people come here with a coin like yours, showing signs of MD on a few parts and think that they have the real deal. Your coin needs to have EXACTLY the same doubling as the variety for it to be the doubled die in question. There isn't "well it has some letters but not others" kind of wiggle room when it comes to these types of varieties. That's where my "is" or "isn't" comment came in. There is not "clear doubling" in the true sense of the term "doubling" on your coin. Your flat shelf-like "doubling" is a clear sign of MD. Have you read through error-ref.com? If not, I suggest you do. There is a lot of good info there.
If it was a DDO the S wouldn't be doubled, since the mint mark was added on the already doubled obverse. Since it is on your coin it's mechanical doubling.
I'm surprised you didn't mention that when you posted a response in this CU thread. https://forums.collectors.com/discu...liberate-error-by-profiteering-mint-employees I can only go by what I've read and seen about the 1969-S DDO https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1969-s-1c-doubled-die-obverse-rd/2923 https://coins.ha.com/itm/lincoln-cents/1969-s-1c-doubled-die-au55-pcgs/a/1130-176.s The working die for the 1969-S Doubled Die was produced when it shifted during annealing or work-hardening, between squeezes or impressions from a working hub. So the true 1969-S Doubled Die, while it shows remarkable separation between the doubled numbers and letters, shows no doubling on the mint mark, which was added later on. https://www.coinworld.com/news/prec...-double-die-obverse-lincoln-cent-in-roll.html http://news.coinupdate.com/doubled-die-lincoln-cent-1810/ https://keydatecoins.com/1969-s-doubled-die-lincoln-cent/ https://www.doubleddie.com/144822.html
