The last pics are blurry. I'm just not seeing a clash of any kind. I found a Jefferson clash. There would possibly be the "O" of MONTECELLO behind the top of his head and possibly the "M" in front of his forehead. His coat would also show coming out of the top of the memorial. I think all this would show if it were a counterclash as it takes two pretty strong clashes to cause this. Am I not right guys? It has to have been something on the coin and another coin pressed into the gunk that left the other images...or something of the sort.
wasn't taken for a clashes, was taken because of dirt, grease, grime etc. take a look at the photos, posted, their from a microscope, heres it is, http://www.dinolite.us/am3011 read it, then you'll understand, what kind of photos it takes, again, NON CENTS, was the only one that pointed that out, hats off to NON CENT
How you interpolate "something stuck to the coin" to mean "the dark areas are a result of the difference between a microscope and camera and they(the dark areas) are indicative of raised metal which was the result of a counter-clash" is beyond me. I'll wait for Simon to clarify his statement though.
you don't need simon, read some of your posts, you said, two die clashes were needed, we already see the extra metal (dome) so heres the die clashes, I'll post three of them
What are those clash remnants of? Nothing lines up. What would those two curved lines, next to the date, be from on the reverse. Nothing. There is nothing over there on the reverse except for "UNUM". It doesn't work. If the flat field clashed, it wouldn't cause two curved lines.
I'm always ready sir, heres what die clahes look like, study them, then you'll know what they look like
My post referenced something, such as epoxy or another substance, NOT METAL, that got stuck to the coin post-mint. I never said metal, and I'm not sure how you could have interpreted me saying so, as a clash doesn't add any metal to the planchet. What I see from the pictures is NOT an error, and Potter will say the same thing.
C'mon now Rick. No, here is what a Jefferson clash looks like. I know what they look like. You see, I discovered this one. Take a look at the name. Some random lines don't make it a clash. Here's mine: http://www.maddieclashes.com/tdc-5c-1978-01.html Oh here is my dime also: http://www.maddieclashes.com/adc-10c-1977d-01.html
I'm not going to aruge, I know theirs extra metal, which makes up the dome, I have the coin, theres more then two die clashes, its full of clashes
Now you're putting words in my mouth too. I never even speculated this coin was a clash, let alone a counter-clash, because it isn't.
Again, Rick, what you are not understanding is there is no more metal on a coin with a die clash than there is on a coin that is struck with normal dies. Any excess material you are seeing is due to something that is not part of the planchet and got stuck to the coin after it was struck.
thanks what not true, some metal was stuck in the die, before this coin got struck, theres where the extra metal came from, I already posted the info
But that doesn't make any sense. If metal was stuck to the die, it would be a strike through, not a coin with extra metal stuck on it. And that also has absolutely nothing to do with a die clash.
There isn't a single thing in that link that says or even implies that there is extra metal involved with a clash.
I have to agree. Extra metal on a die has absolutely nothing to do with a clash, counter clash or anything else other than a struck through. If the extra metal that was on the die was transferred to the struck planchet, it would be a retained struck through. Clashes cause EXISTING metal of the planchet to become raised or incuse, depending on what element on the die clashes.
I'll be curious to see this coin at the show. Rick, I am the guy who mans the CONECA table and sits with Potter at the shows, you and I talked for about an hour at the PANS show.