It is the way they are classified and labelled by PCGS and ICG. Not all the 94's are FS.
Actually the 94' and 97' both receive the FS designation.
It's not machine doubling, because of the tilted die, when the planchet is struck and pressure is applied the die face moves at a slight angle, in...
It really depends on your set up. I tend to blast the coin with too much light and then change the settings.
Thanks, it is a neat find. There are many of these minor errors out there, but for the most part not valuable at all. The only way a minor error...
And it's not even an accented hair, yep definitely foolish.
It's only the 1994 Jefferson that has a designation for FS. I think that it has to do with missing frosting on the steps, well this is my thoughts...
SO, yes, it is a vertically misaligned die. one of the pick ups is a tapered looking coin. In this case the right side of the coin is paper thin...
It was Facetious.
A dime from the coin star today. The obverse is slightly larger than the obv. [ATTACH] [ATTACH] Here are a few shots of the opposite third sides....
And you don't want to be the one holding the torch.
Those are awesome!
It looks descent for an MS coin, Just not even a PL IMO. At $300 you would be in there at a PCGS AU55 Price point.
Spooning will loosen the plating to the point it will flake off.
The coins were struck in a Matte finish according to the Red Book. ICG may have just called it a Satin Finish. This one sold in 22 it has nearly...
That sucks.
It looks like a VAM-3, Be leary about the Gem+++. It could grade a 63 or 64, more likely a 63. The coin looks baggy even in the bright exposure.
DDD Die deterioration doubling. I got a little excited and added one to many D's. Interesting seems we need a weight.
Nice been on the hunt for one in the wild for a long time. Looks stage B to me.
Also, the MM was hand punched into the die face, When you see the same doubling on the MM as the rest of the details. it is guaranteed to be a MD...
Separate names with a comma.
