Doubling or Disappointment?

[stephanie.vazquez84]

Will somebody please confirm whether or not this is true doubling? Thanks!

[stephanie.vazquez84]

[MintErrors]

In in this

Will somebody please confirm whether or not this is true doubling? Thanks!

---

---

In my opinion, one of the possible doubling is flat and shelf like. This appears the on the G and the bottom of the R. I added a few links to my last post to you, they should apply to this coin as well.

Here is another post about a doubled die from 1972. Notice the height of the doubling on IN GOD WE TRUST, and how the letters are at the same height and thicker looking.

https://minterrors.org/index.php/197...-doubled-dies/

I forgot to mention on your last post, to please add in some where the date and mint mark (if any) of the coin that is in the post. It allows us to point you to correct listings, and if it is a doubled die, show the exact same coin from the website listings.

Let me say this - there will be tons of disappointments in this Hobby. That is because there are a ton more worthless doubling than true doubled dies available.But - when you find your first doubled die, it's like a total shock, it will help erase all of those worthless doubling finds.

Don't forget to look at the mintmark to see if there is a re-punched mintmark.

Happy hunting.

[stephanie.vazquez84]

Thank you, Mr. Kozera for the response as well as the information and links you provided. I’m following up with you not to question you or because I doubt what you say, more so, because im desperately trying to learn to identify true doubling so I would appreciate some clarification in order to further my understand. I’ve attached some of the same photos in my original post, however, I placed arrows where I believe I see notching, which, if I’m not mistaken, notches are used to identify true doubling.

Would you please provide me some further insight as to whether or not this indeed notching and if it is, how would this not qualify as an identifying marker to classify this as true doubling?

As I said before, I come to you with the greatest of respect and only come to you from clarification because I see no body else more qualified that you and the other volunteers in this site to learn from.

kind regards and many thanks,
Stephanie

[MintErrors]

Mrs. Vazquez,

Please, call me Gary. No need for formalities here. I understand what you are saying and I do have some examples in my posts - BUT - they are not of your coin, and each coin type can be a bit different in color, photographs and many other variables.

When I see your photos on the PC, they are kind of small. You should be able to attach the photo in the post, and by doing so, you can choose the size of the photo. I typically use medium or full size. So an 800x800 pixel photo can fill up the full frame of the forum. After your photos have been uploaded, click in the post where you want a photo to be. Then choose the photo and size.

The biggest thing I can offer for clarity is that both impressions should be really close to the same height,. if one is lower, flat and almost step like, then it may very well be worthless doubling that is sort of off-axis, making it look like its split serif or notching. Another thing is some times the IN GOD WE TRUST can be clipped by worthless doubling or a coin counter machine. I see this a lot in the letters like O, D, W, E, T, R mainly.

What Year is this coin?

What I will do is provide some more photos of doubled dies in this post. I will have to take the photos, resize them and then upload them, please be slightly patient with me while I go to the storage unit tomorrow, grab a box and bring them to the home office. I may have a few in a box around here, but I will have to dig.

In the mean time, have a look at these:

[MintErrors]

Thank you, Mr. Kozera for the response as well as the information and links you provided. I’m following up with you not to question you or because I doubt what you say, more so, because im desperately trying to learn to identify true doubling so I would appreciate some clarification in order to further my understand. I’ve attached some of the same photos in my original post, however, I placed arrows where I believe I see notching, which, if I’m not mistaken, notches are used to identify true doubling.

Would you please provide me some further insight as to whether or not this indeed notching and if it is, how would this not qualify as an identifying marker to classify this as true doubling?

As I said before, I come to you with the greatest of respect and only come to you from clarification because I see no body else more qualified that you and the other volunteers in this site to learn from.

kind regards and many thanks,
Stephanie

---

---

I found a 1968-S Proof Lincoln Cent in a box here at the office. I took quick photos and what I am trying to show you is that the cookie cutter style lines can be seen really close to the top of each letter. That's where one impression is placed right on top of another, and it is just slightly off. I added arrows to the areas to look closely at.

From here, I am going to click on the CAMERA icon to the top left of this text box.

I select "upload attachments".

I navigate on my PC where the photos are.

I upload them one at a time

Below the Upload attachments button are a list of all the photos.

I place my cursor on the post where I want the photos to show up and I click on Large and......


1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-IN.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-GO.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-OD.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-WE.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-TR.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-US.jpg

1968-S Lincoln Proof DDO-ST.jpg

[MintErrors]

1962 Proof that I have on a thumb drive:

1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-19xxx-x4.jpg

1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-xx62-x4.jpg

Look at this "T" ! It is probably the BEST example I have ever seen to show there is literally one "T" over the top of another. It shows the cookie cutter lines and it just looks.... awesome


1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-TRUST-T-x4.jpg

1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-TRUST-R-x4.jpg

1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-TRUST-U-x4.jpg


1962-prf-ddo-lincoln-TRUST-S-x4.jpg

[stephanie.vazquez84]

Thank you, Gary. The time you took to provide me these reference photos is unbelievably appreciated. I really didn’t mean to put you through the trouble!!!

The photos in my original post are of a 1973 S penny. I know this makes it even more unlikely it has true doubling, however, when I was online doing further research I came across a listing of a 1973S penny that has ‘doubling’ very similar to mine. I am aware that it’s common for penny’s of the same year and mintmark to have the same errors, but I’m not exactly sure if the same rule applies when it comes to machine doubling. I’ve included the following images for comparison, although, I understand you’re quite certain what I have is not in fact true doubling. My photos are the ones with the purple dot on the bottom, the photos I found online do not have the dots.
Although the errors aren’t identical, they do have some similarities between the two.


Nevertheless, Gary, I thank you wholeheartedly for your consistent communication, helpful insight and of course the countless resources you’ve provided me.

[MintErrors]

Thank you, Gary. The time you took to provide me these reference photos is unbelievably appreciated. I really didn’t mean to put you through the trouble!!!

The photos in my original post are of a 1973 S penny. I know this makes it even more unlikely it has true doubling, however, when I was online doing further research I came across a listing of a 1973S penny that has ‘doubling’ very similar to mine. I am aware that it’s common for penny’s of the same year and mintmark to have the same errors, but I’m not exactly sure if the same rule applies when it comes to machine doubling. I’ve included the following images for comparison, although, I understand you’re quite certain what I have is not in fact true doubling. My photos are the ones with the purple dot on the bottom, the photos I found online do not have the dots.
Although the errors aren’t identical, they do have some similarities between the two.


Nevertheless, Gary, I thank you wholeheartedly for your consistent communication, helpful insight and of course the countless resources you’ve provided me.

---

---

You are welcome Stephanie.

One thing I try my best at is offer a lengthy reply to help a person. A short answer more than likely provides limited data and in my opinion, offers no educational benefit.

I believe it's important to know the reliability of the references. Some are spot on in being true and legit, others, not so much. For doubled dies, it's vital to see the exact same area has the doubling which typically shows devices ( letters, numbers, building, people, etc.) thicker. I will add references at the bottom.

If part of the letter is high, and another part is low, with one area lower, making the letters or numbers look thinner, then it is probably worthless doubling.

I have to throw out there that a doubled die can also have machine doubling on it, but its not very common.
Can machine doubling be duplicated over many coins? I believe so, ONLY IF the conditions stay the same.

Doubled dies are working dies that are made of steel. IF one of these working dies required more than one impression from to get all the details from the master working hub to the working die and these impressions were slightly off axis, a doubled die was born. Working dies with the doubled die were add to the minting presses and would start producing coins. The Lincoln Cent working dies were able to make close to 1 million coins, before being retired from service.

Since the working dies are steel rods at its simplest form, these impressions and the doubling on the working die do not move. They should be located at the very same location(s). The doubled die is then found, and photographed and documented at several websites dedicated to numismatics (coin collecting).

The coin you have, the lettering in LIBERTY in my opinion, shows some classic machine doubling. It looks very flat. What may have happened in the minting press was not set up correctly, resulting in the machine doubling the image of the coin either from the coin or machine shaking, ejecting the coin in mid strike or other possible timing issues. The coin presses typically run at jackhammer speeds. People are human and occasionally make mistakes. Add in a machine that is set up by humans and the probability of things going wrong over time increases.



Being it 1973-S, if it were my coin, I would visit:

https://coppercoins.com - at the very top left of the page is a "Die variety search" link

Spoiler alert - Coppercoins, lists only one 1973-S, but that is a proof coin, and not a normal business strike coin, that we commonly use. So that means no business strike coins were found at the San Francisco mint in 1973.

https://coppercoins.com/lincoln/dies...&die_state=eds

https://doubleddie.com - This site has many good articles, including an area about "worthless doubling". In there, they show comparison between a doubled die and some different types of worthless doubling.


http://varietyvista.com "was" the standard for CONECA listings, but CONECA has decided to take back the listings and do it themselves. Nothing wrong with that. At variety vista are listings that are easy to navigate and have links to many different types of modern US Coins.

Spoiler alert - Same with variety vista, they list the same proof coin with a doubled die only. No business strikes (normal coins) listed.
http://varietyvista.com/09d%20WQ%20V...O%201973-S.htm

https://conecaonline.info - It's coming along, and there are some pretty good reference photos there. I think Lincoln Cents and Jefferson Nickels are nearly complete. Volunteers work on this site, so it is updated when time permits.

I do have some examples of LIBERTY that have similar worthless doubling. I will post them when I can find the photos.

[MintErrors]

A 1968-S Business strike showing some worthless, flat doubling on the date and LIBERTY. I apologize for the branding, but these photos were taken, and I currently do not know where this coin is.

1968-S Lincoln-MD-date-19xx.jpg 1968-S Lincoln-MD-date-xx68.jpg 1968-S Lincoln-MD-LIB.jpg

1968-S Lincoln-MD-ER.jpg

[MintErrors]

stephanie.vazquez84

Last post for now. You asked if rules applied to worthless doubling compared to a doubled die. Exact answer: No, but it can be close. Like the examples listed below. IF a machine was set up striking coins with a condition that remained constant, then sure that might produce exact duplicates of machine doubling. Its a complex question, and answer.

With true doubled dies, more than one impression sunk into a working die will have that working striking coins, and each one giving a doubled die that looks almost exactly the same - minus age of the die. With age, some of the areas may be more or less pronounced.

As for machine doubling, the conditions can vary. The working die can be removed. When the mint workers remove the dies for maintenance and place them back into the machine, adjusting it slightly different and the "old" condition is no longer visible.

Below, I found three examples of a 1972 Lincoln Cent with some worthless doubling / damage. You can be the judge whether these worthless doubling examples are close enough as to looking the same.

1972-MD-coin-00001.jpg

1972-MD-coin-00001b.jpg 1972-MD-coin-00002.jpg

1972-MD-coin-00003.jpg