1970 S Proof Small Date DDO-012

It looks like MD to me as well, particularly the bottom of the 7 and 0.

I was a little disappointed by the reception my coin received. I took more photos to try and convince the skeptics. To be clear - these photos are not of the same coin, I have 9 that I believe are all the same die. I selected a different one this time hoping that it will photograph better.
Additionally, I will reference to Wexler's
Here is the description:


The photos from that site.






Here is my coin:







Wexler does not show the IGWT, but mentions a small spread. On the VV listing (which I believe is the same die) it does show the IGWT.












The date area:

And a closeup of the 7:

Lastly, the nose area:

Here are side by sides of the mintmark locations of the two dies you suggested:

The V.V suggestion for the mintmark location was not even close. So that one is out. The Wexler listing seems very close. But the size differences of the devices seem to steer me away from this one. The extra large images of a single device remove any perspective of what really is going on with your coin. I prefer the Full image size of the devices on
1. IN GOD
2. D_WE_T
3. TRUST
4. Liberty
5. Date and mintmark area.
Single device images are a desperate attempt to show something, but the context is removed on single devices. The sites like to break up the devices. I put them back together again to see how strong they really are. Keep in mind that Machine Doubling affects the proof coin more as the are struck twice. IF MD happens on the first strike, the second strike flattens that and adds more MD most times. So like on the Variety Vista shot you can see flat field doubling on that image and others on that site.
http://varietyvista.com/01b%20LC%20...0SDDO012.htm
Mostly seen on the date area images of this site.
While the coin looks promising, I've not yet determined which die it is yet. It may even be a new die? But mintmark locations come first. Then spread on the devices next.

I just noticed the cross over Wexler suggested, DDO-015 is a large date and not a proof?

Just realized your coin is a large date. Now got to go back and check again for a match.

I really don't think so.


I'll take some. I set up to take microscope shots. not regular shots.

Can we revisit the Large Date/Small Date issue?




Of the three primary criteria for making the small date determination the OP's coin appear to have them all:

1. chiseled end of the 9 rather than blunt end
2. end of the nine points more towards the center of the 7
3. the top of the 7 and the top of the 1 and 9 are at the same level (whereas in the Large Date the 7 is lower)

The OP's coin also matches the two examples shown, both of which are designated as small date coins.

What am I missing?

It's a small date and a DDO. Very nice find, send it to one of the attributors.

Congrats. I concur that it is a DDO with md.

A bit of overkill on the pics but they are proof [no pun intended].

Hard to tell if it is #12 [exactly] -- At that magnification you can probably find more DDs.

Well I've learned some new things about this year. I seen two different listings for the 1970-S Small dates. They were showing a FS-1401 and FS-1402. No explanations for these. So they must be the sub departments for the small dates? Nothing found on that term yet. I know the 1909 VDB/no VDB had a sub division used two sets of year varieties. So that must be what those numbers are for? (I guess it must be a secret?)