1970S Jefferson Nickel Business Strike not Proof possible RPM

[rbroederer]

I am looking at a 1970S Jefferson Nickel. The coin is a business strike coin from a mint set and not a proof (although it is proof-like in appearance and may be).
The positioning of the mint mark is similar to RPM-003 on VV. There appears to be doubling or tripling on the inside of the lower "S". The doubling looks more pronounced than the coin on VV. Thoughts or comments?

[eaxtellcoin]

Rotate your mintmark so the lighting comes more from the bottom. The position I'm not sure because I cannot see the hair band in Dr. Wiles Photo. The only possibility listed is RPM#3. With the lighting in these photo's i'm not even sure this is an RPM. Photo #3 is a bit out of focus and the lighting is at the NE - Please turn the coin to give us a better idea of what you are seeing with an arrow. Thank You
Eric

[rbroederer]

Here as more pictures of the subject coin. I hope this shows you what you are looking for.

[eaxtellcoin]

Sorry rbroederer, I cannot verify the coin.
The marker is not listed on Dr.Wiles's website.
The photo's above are dark and I really cannot tell much in comparison to the coins position in relation to the small area photo's on Dr. Wiles's website.
This coin, to me is 50/50 listed. It may be RPM#3, it maybe not.- I think at least I can see what appears to be an RPM, lighter photo's would help.
Eric

[rbroederer]

Sorry for the confusion. WRPM-003 on DD is a PROOF coin(even though the subject coin has the reverse die marker from WRPM-003 on DD which begs the question could they have used the proof die for business strikes? Or could a business strike planchet have gotten into a proof batch? That may or may not be a separate discussion). This coin is not a proof coin and therefore the comparison is to RPM-003 on VV (unless the discussion with WRPM-003 is relevant). The subject coin is proof-like in appearance and brightening the pictures tends to lose the details. Here are several brighter new pics. Thanks

[eaxtellcoin]

I'm sorry I just do not see an RPM. The middle photo is blown up so far it's distorted/Over Pixled. Happens when folks us a cell phone in the normal 600 pix setting. The close ups need to be photographed in Fine not normal so when you zoom the photo does not become distorted.
I don't see anything in the darker third photo. I'm sorry partner to put you through all the work, photo's close up are not easy to do.
Eric

[rbroederer]

Thanks for all the help. All the pictures were taken with a Plugable Technologies Digital Viewer. The only thing that varied was the angle and the light intensity. The last set of pics was with the light turned up as requested and due to the proof-like surface on the coin it got very reflective which was why I presented the "darker" pics first because I thought you got more detail. The only difference between pic 1 and pic 3 is the angle no difference in the intensity of the light source. Pic 2 is a blown up and cropped version of pic 1. I would certainly be open to suggestions of some other source of photography that doesn't cost thousands of dollars...microscope? I can see a lot more detail with my BL 20X loupe but it doesn't take pics! lol

[jcuve]

Thanks Eric. I cannot verify anything either. Note: this mintmark style has some anomalies present in the middle of the mintmark that will be more less apparent depending on the depth of the punching.