1954 D DDR #001

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by Walter Marx, Jul 17, 2019.

  1. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    Screenshot_20190717-052912.png Screenshot_20190717-052934.png Screenshot_20190717-052928.png Screenshot_20190717-052943.png Screenshot_20190717-052939.png Screenshot_20190717-052950.png Screenshot_20190717-052928.png Screenshot_20190717-052955.png Screenshot_20190717-052918.png

    Attached Files:

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank

    I see nothing
  4. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    Right on what did you check it against?
  5. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    Sorry but I do not see any doubling.
  6. Kentucky

    Kentucky Supporter! Supporter

    What did you check it against since you say it is DDR #001
  7. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    Variety Vista . I .do have a verysketcver camera and better photos will clear it all up. I'll stop using my equipment on coins tath have heavier wear since they're the pictures that just don't help. Coin has all the indicators listed and I know to an audience like this my confidence means nothing. If one of guys wants to see it in person I'll mail it to. Any takers? Lol anyway , take care
  8. desertgem

    desertgem MODERATOR Senior Errer Collecktor Moderator

    Variety vista lists the 1954-D DDR 001 as a proof and yours appears MS from the photos. Still early, so if I misread VV ( as I usually don't use it, let me know, Jim
  9. Clawcoins

    Clawcoins Well-Known Member

    EDIT ... I just noticed you reference DDR .. not DDO .. so ignore the below. I like to check the E PLURIBUS of which yours is heavily damaged and doesn't look like DDR-001 for a PROOF coin, which yours isn't a proof.

    One of the most visual aspect of 1954 D DDO-001
    is the "IN GOD" fattening of the upper part of the letters. It's quite pronounced in the VV images, such as:
    which is totally missing in your image

    It may be more similar to 002, but I use the Date for that initial identification of which your images are not clear and close enough to see. BUT the MM position isn't there for 002 anyways (nor for 003).

    so I'm with the others in that I see nothing in related to Variety Vista DDs.
    Also, be aware that even though your cent is "nice" it's still has a good amount of wear and damage from circulation.
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  10. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    My apologies to everyone, I screwed up, the 1954 was setting beside a 1946 and I had the obverse of the 54 and reverse of the 46 together, after checking the 46 I took some pics of the 54 and somehow I forgot all about that 46 and it's reverse, that goes to show that to many late hours investigating pennies can make one aloppy, this one anyway. AAbone head move. You're looking at 1946 DDR 1. My apologies again.
    Collecting Nut likes this.
  11. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    We all make mistakes. Thank you for the correction. I can only laugh and hope others do the same. LOL
    Walter Marx likes this.
  12. Walter Marx

    Walter Marx Active Member

    I've made bigger ones , no shame. I feel bad for the people sitting at home typing undoubtedly calling me some colorful names in utter frustration, to them I say, I'm sure you've had or will have your moment some time. Thanks everyone, hope you can relax.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page