I'm late to this party, and have very little to add - except : Sir, your coin is damaged, and has nothing, repeat nothing, to do with anything,...
Sorry, but it's damaged on the obv. The scratch marks are visible from whatever attached Thomas J.
If it doesn't weigh 3.1 grams, it's a slug. Based on the photos only, it doesn't look like a cent Type 1 blank.
That's an A-type example of numismatic pareidolia. There is no die clash where you are pointing too.......sorry.......
Yep
As mentioned above, you're looking way too close up to find minor anomalies. If it can't be seen with a 10 x or 15 x loupe, it's not worth it....
Obvious counterfeit
The 1955-D has a die chip in the MM, but I do not see any doubling on the coin's obverse.
Just saw this thread - I think Pickn&Grinin got it - It appears to be a piece of compressed metal (a flake or two off another planchet that fell...
Minor die polishing, in all probability.
Now that's a nice find in circulation ! Congrats -
Sorry, I don't see a die crack from his eyebrow over his head' - can you highlight in color, or with arrows, where the die crack is that you see?...
If you're counting the reeding, then that's the 'portion sticking out'.
If there's something raised, then it's clear glue, in all probability.
Based on the photos, it's not a die crack. It's a stain - both of them, at the top and at the right of the obv. One photo (the 5th) looks like...
worse than the normal 'environmental damage' It's badly corroded
It's a rim cud, not a finned rim.
Not a wrong planchet - As mentioned above, what you see occurred after the coin was in circulation. The surfaces are damaged; not an error of...
I agree - a stain of some type
The doubling you see is the very common 'ejection' or 'mechanical' doubling type, very common on all denominations. The obv. has a minute MAD...
Separate names with a comma.
