| Author |
 Replies: 69 / Views: 2,345 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1996 Posts |
The area outside the hump-shaped line appears to be acid-etched. That's why there's a "step".
Error coin writer and researcher.
|
|
New Member
United States
42 Posts |
Wow... I've never really examined this side of the coin much. The more I look at the raised lines in front of the nose, the more it looks like the lines are metal that should have been in the "nose eye socket" area? Is this possible or just a coincident? The lines almost correspond to the pitting?
|
|
New Member
United States
42 Posts |
Someone else had suggested that as well. Is this an intentional process or just a fluke from an auto shop/industry? Thank you so much for your consideration.
|
|
New Member
United States
42 Posts |
I just searched acid etch coins. The coins I found were dull, sand blasted looking almost. This coin is quite shiny on both sides including the raised and lowered area. The photo's that I took on an angle make the coin appear dull from light and digital effect.
|
|
New Member
United States
42 Posts |
Here is a 1979 dime I found lying around as a control to compare. Both the '79 and 67' are in similar condition. When you look at the control lettering around the perimeter it actually looks like the "image" on my 1967 is raised. Is it possible nothing has been removed =, only raised. the lower portion on my 67' looks to be at the right elevation in comparison to the control?   |
|
Valued Member
United States
176 Posts |
Middle peg of the E to me is a die break. The whole thing to me is a cool die crack.
It doesn't go include the leaves b/c they are higher up (the negative if you will) in the die and haven't broken yet.
Edited by Kulman47
01/03/2021 11:45 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
At first, I was hoping that there was an exotic die event explanation. It didn't look like typical forms of PMD. But after reading the thoughts of others and studying the pics more, I am in the old (literally, as in done a long time ago) acid etch camp right now. 1. It explains the "step" as Mike Diamond said. 2. It explains the different toning. The middle area appears brighter. The outside is dirtier and duller, especially around the letters. On the other hand, I don't see a way die events would explain the difference in toning. An acid etch doesn't have to leave grotesque pitting or reduce the weight enough that the coin wouldn't still be in tolerance, even with a scale capable of enough precision to get an adequate measurement. In a previous life, I did these types of experiments on aluminum. With a mild etch, it sometimes was easy to see an effect under magnification that was almost impossible to get a corresponding mass loss on, even with balances capable of weighing down to the milligram level. 3. As another member said, the area around the E has a similar line which is bothersome to explain. Acid etch explains both areas. For the die event explanation to work, it would seem that two things would have to be going on at the same time. Edited by Numiscrat
01/04/2021 01:51 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
90 Posts |
Well, there is another camp that I might revisit: the glue (really any foreign substance) on the back. That also could explain the difference in color/toning. I realize you did the acetone soak as instructed, but there are adhesives and finishes (some epoxy formulations, as an example) which are very solvent resistant by design, and again, detecting a thin film with a scale capable of plus/minus 0.1g would be unlikely.
|
|
New Member
United States
42 Posts |
Thanks to everyone! The amount of attention considering my find is flattering. I finally have a favorite web-site after all these years. You guys are great I've learned more in a few days than in the last couple years. I can't thank you all enough. I'll try to find something more traditional for my next post...?
|
|
Replies: 69 / Views: 2,345 |
|
Posted 01/03/2021 12:57 pm
