The only RPM I see it could remotely be is WRPM-005 and with the amount of wear and what that picture shows, leaves a vast divide between having a long-shot chance and it simply being a normal regular 1969S. Maybe..... Now if you see anything like this in hand, keep taking pictures until you produce some that show it. If you can't and you know what you have could be this, well then you know. It isn't impossible that what you have once looked like this before being circulated, but, your picture doesn't make a case, it only opens the door. The die polish lines? Maybe, can't tell much about those from your pix either and I'm thinking even if they were somewhat different, that may simply reflect a different die stage. If they are the same, for sure that's a good sign. Even the tail end of your nine could possibly be the same as the one shown after some wear, maybe.
I missed that area below the S, good catch. This is a reference that I use. Maybe @Ordinary Fool can post his reference.
No problem http://doubleddie.com/311222.html last one on the page He has his work cut out for himself to verify it in hand, much less capturing it with a camera if that's important. Worn coins can be tough, dirty makes it much harder so at least his isn't dirty!
So much sage advice, thanks all. I have taken Ordinary Fools advice and done the acetone soak when I run across a dirty coin. I went to Variety Vista and my Cherry Pickers' and they showed the die lines on the body of the "S" and material in the loops as well, so I thought the mass in the upper loop of the "S" might be an indicator and the mark below the "S" was probably a blister in the zinc. Thanks for all the perspectives.
That one isn't on Variety Vista, it is on Wexler's Site at the link above, last one on the page. Doubtful your cent is blistered and if it is that RPM and you can see it in hand, it would be cool if you could photograph it to prove it. It may take several attempts from several angles, playing with lighting, and you may have to take shots of it from not directly overhead even if you have to jack one side of it up. Notice the attribution shot isn't from directly overhead and notice his image file size is both larger than yours and with more detail. All I did to your picture was crop it like that photograph, I didn't compress it. What you are using, may not be able to prove it, if you can see it. But maybe if you play with it enough.
Although it is possible that it is an S/S south I think it falls in the DDD category because of the haze and doubling around the peripherys of the date. The ding in the six and the flatness of the lower curve of the S seem to line up.
Are you sold that is is 005? I'm not from the pix so far and think if it is, you're going to need more magnification and maybe smaller pixels to make it stand out. I still see it may be possible having a reasonable idea of what appears to be limitations in your imaging device. Maybe try a magnifying glass or reader lens?
