1909 VDB issues in dies or doubling? both sides

not the best lighting job I don't think

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Two more, one of each side... the rev. shows a nice crescent.... I know I need the TGP to be the ones to confirm this, Nice to imagine though

 

I don't understand. Crescent?

 

In this picture and a previous one you see what appears to be part or obscured piece of the crescent that is a indicator for a Matte proof.

 

OK, the coin: The full-face images make Mike's explanation of a double strike much easier to envision - the rotation (where visible) is consistent and exactly proportional. It's a pleasant revelation to know that a double strike can manifest with incomplete stroke weights on the second hit; seems to me the only way that can happen is if the die was in the process of rotating at the moment of the strike.

The images: First, are you familiar with EXIF Data? If not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchangeable_image_file_format

http://www.howtogeek.com/203592/what-is-exif-data-and-how-to-remove-it/

Your images still have EXIF data embedded. This bothers me not at all; I do not enable geotagging in any of my images and prefer that data is available to onlookers. With it, though, I was able to determine what phone you're using and what the settings were for your photographs. That phone goes on my list of "recommended candidates" for coin imaging.

First, force it not to HDR the images. Any in-phone processing will take away from the final appearance of the image; if you're going to postprocess, use your (far more powerful) computer and more complex editing software. I think ambient light cost you a little contrast; try to light the coin only with what you're specifically providing to the image, as light bouncing off nearby surfaces into the lens costs contrast.

As long as your goal is to create a more faithful image of the coin, there's nothing against using postprocessing software to get there. It helps to make up for minor problems in image quality. Here's your first set, corrected for rotation (infuriates me ) and sharpened and contrasted a little, and saved at smaller filesize:





I didn't bother with the background, which is why it looks a little "cut off" from rotating and cropping to the coin. The phone's HDR function made the images a little bit "too much of everything," but I didn't want to get enough into details to lower saturations and play with color, just a couple quick corrections to show some goals for the future.

They could be sharper; you may need to play with distance somewhat. The originals are plenty large enough that you can consider backing the phone off somewhat in the interest of sharpness and easier lighting; work towards a final coin size of about 1000 pixels.

 

I was concerned about the HDR. thought it may be too much.. also the lighting.. I will eliminate all other artificial lighting.

I use this to take all my progress pictures for work. it does give great resolution for this.

I can fiddle with the pixels and resolution on my computer..I will back off from the coin more and I can adjust contrast and such on my computer also,
briefly looking at the EXIF info, seems pretty easy to turn it off. so when I take pics of coins and stuff I can turn of and back on for work pictures.

Very good information and help SDAVE!!. I will make a few more with these bits of information in mind.

 

I zoomed in on these ... Is that OK to do?

 

how did you rotate to adjust for true vertical alignment?

 

That is definitely an error.

 

Yes, several noted persons have commented and the consensus is it is a double strike in the collar.

 

He probably downloaded it, rotated it, then reposted. It's just about the easiest thing to do in terms of photo editing

 

Although not an error specific specialist, conder is another one of those "noted" persons

 

mine only allows me to rotate 90 or 180. what software do you guys use

 

AHHHHH, nice to meet you Conder.. Im pretty new here not familiar with everyone(profile names)

 

Coin is on its way to be assessed and graded

 

NGC has the coin and I am patiently awaiting what they label the coin.. well I am quite fidgety actually.

 

Did you describe it on the form as something besides a 1909-VDB 1c? You want Camire and Rick to see it. If just sent as a regular coin with no indication that it may be more than a strike doubled coin it may pass through the service as nothing special.

 

I sent as a error with a notation about extreme doubling I believe, and to check for Matte proof..
should I have mentioned anything else?

 

It has been there since 5-2-16. the 2 other coins I sent with it have already been attributed their error designations... although those were pretty easy ones to attribute

 

I meant double strike. not doubling per say