I voted MS66 those little luster grazes I don't believe hold this back any. What could is the bag mark in the tiara.
Oh, yeah I guessed MS65
Besides the little ding in the eagles breast the devices are amazing. If it wasn't for the chatter an the obverse fields I think it would go...
After another all day soak in Acetone it did almost nothing. I am now wondering what to do next. I am starting to think she will go into an album...
What are the specifics nowadays for a DMPL. Isn't it 4 to 6 inches? Or, has the market changed those specifics?
That looks like MD. Or, a slight bit of Die Deterioration doubling. Kinda hard to tell from the photos.
Good question then, nothing wrong with being a joker. Nice bill and 09' VDB DDO from your other thread.
I kept saying to myself, just hold on a few....
This is incused doubling. It is a form of Mechanical doubling or MD. http://www.error-ref.com/?s=incuse+doubling
This looks like a lamination, common on US nickels.
Extremely difficult to judge scuffs from a weak strike. Being that a dime made it into a quarter coining chamber. We can expect that it will be...
So we have only one that called this as PCGS did. @Evan Saltis I think many more would have said the same if my photos would have shown more of...
Hopefully they didn't grade this above gem. That contact is very focal for a small coin.
Do you have any of the attribution sites? Such as Variety Vista http://varietyvista.com/index.htm Wexlers site Doubledie...
Looking forward to the fantastic photos.
The Mint Mark was moved to the obverse in 1968 1965, 66, 67 were all Special Mint sets and none of the coinage had a MM.
IN 1963 the MM was placed on the reverse by the Monticello. The D is correct, just not an RPM.
That has what is called MD. Machine doubling. It is flat and shelf like. This is not the same as a repunched mint mark.
MS65 I really don't see much contact under the toning. It just isn't blazing with luster like I would expect it too for a higher grade.
Squiggles was he a member here?
Separate names with a comma.
