Is This a 1914d?

I bought this many months ago at a coin show, for 50 cents in a junk box, because under the date I thought I saw a mint mark. Anyways, Could this be a Denver mintmark or just damage? I have the photo of my coin side by side with a photo of where the mint mark should be on an online photo. I will take more clear photos later.

Am I the only one who thinks they see a "D" under the date?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I see one but need larger photo of just your coin. There are four different mint mark positions for 14-D cents.

 

When I have the chance later I will take more photos.

 

Kinda looks like it to me

 

Sorry, but there are 5;

 

If anything, looks like an S to me. But more likely just random texture.

 

I see a backwards D, an upside-down S, and even a Jesus is I look just right.... a proper D in a proper location? Unfortunately, no...

 

@rim's cents

Don't be sorry, thanks! I'm very interested to discover where you found this information.

 

I do not think I could find the thread again, but the info came from Lincoln Cent Forum. The pictures came from Heritage and I put it together.

BTW, the tagging works better if you use r l m (RLM).

 

THANKS for fast reply. I'll get back to you tomorrow - waiting to hear from a TPGS finalizer. I'm going to loose sleep over this but I cannot wait to be educated and corrected.

Until then, IMHO, the Lincoln Cent forum guys are nuts! Additionally, IMHO micrograph #4 and #5 show the same obverse die.

 

Except if you overlay them, the MM for #5 is slightly higher and to the left of #4.

 

Something is there but whatever it is I don't think it's a D.

 

That tiny amount of difference (I don't see it) is virtually worthless to distinguish different dies in the real world of coin authentication. Heck, using that "micro" difference, there may be five or six 16-D dime dies instead of the accepted four illustrated in the ANA's Counterfeit Detection book. That's just MHO. I'm sticking to my opinion of four positions until I hear from the two authenticators I reached out to. Then, if I am incorrect, I will eat humble pie and praise you and the Lincoln Cent forum members for their excellent research.

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

Looks like a "d" to me. If so, great find!

 

@rlm's cents

I have just heard from a TPGS finalizer and counterfeit expert and a well-known published variety/authentication instructor. They did not know the answer! One long time professional authenticator claims there are only FOUR positions. I am going to reach out to other authenticators I know to set the record straight - one way or another.

You get a big gold star in my book. I'm glad you disagreed in your post as you have caused quite an eye-opening shakeup among professional authenticators who I would have thought should know the answer!

I plan to contact some other friends in order to convince you there are only four.

 

Here's what happens when you overlay the two images together.

The two images are "stacked" and the "D" MM is made centered on top.

The 1914 date is skewed heavily to the bottom-left.

Not sure if that's due to circulation wear, pic size difference, etc. - you decide.





Crudely color-coated:



Adjusting image rotation and aligning date in lieu of MM:

 

The 2 you picked are obviously not a match. But that proves nothing. There are 4 or 5 different positions for the MM. You have to do the same with all other locations to prove it is nt a match.

 

SEE POST #17 ABOVE FOR IMAGES.

Perhaps you need to learn about making an overlay. It is very useful to take the micrographs of the date at the EXACT same power of magnification. Otherwise, one may ass ume there are five, six, or more mint mark positions.

After being astonished that several widely known professionals could not refute the comments you learned in a "phantom" thread by "whomever" the "experts" were who wrote it, I have sent an Email of this discussion to a columnist for him to write an article about authenticating these coins. If he does, perhaps someone who knows for sure will pop up. Again, you have my respect as an inquisitive numismatist!

PS IMO,this is the reason we are even having this discussion:

When you say: "Not sure if that's due to circulation wear, pic size difference, etc. - you decide." THAT'S THE PROBLEM. I have decided, your micrograph #4 and #5 are the same position. I'll still believe what I learned in counterfeit detection seminars - four positions. Now, I'll need to wait and see.

 

From my picture, I tried overlaying his original picture. It is too fuzzy to tell for sure, but it comes real close to #4 and #5.