Machine doubling takes material away from the letters, whereas a doubled die will add to it.
Looks like it was on the planchet before striking. The lines are wider where the strike is the heaviest.
Did you know that some error coins are very valuable?
As you may already know this site wasn't working for awhile. So maybe that's why the response's aren't rushing in like usual. As for the coin...
It looks legitimate to me.
Yep, some nut job. You can see the evidence on the reverse that it was hammered.
Same thing.
Looks like 'plating split doubling' to me.
Never mind, I'll answer my own question; Here's a statment that Mike made on another forum; "On the question of what does and does not...
Great find!!
Glad to see the site up again!! Does that mean that if a coin was damaged in the mint such as a ding or any other mark produce at the mint,...
It sure looks like one or a weak strike. Only parts of the central design show on each side of the coin.
Just Bubbles.
I like toning and wished I knew more. However the toning here is to obvious on all his coins to be NT.
Could be a die clash mark from the area below the ear. [ATTACH]
Microscopes work also for the real close up shot's. [ATTACH]
A break or a chip.
I look at them all. These weren't discovered until well after the minting of each.
If the doubling is there I can't see it. Picture to blurry.
Did you try and match it to any on coppercoins? Doesn't look like a RPM.
Separate names with a comma.
