| Author |
 Replies: 28 / Views: 11,720 |
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1943 Posts |
Wert, your cent looks like it's possibly a collar counter clash if it isn't PMD from another coin pressing against it. But I am not sure from the photo. Edited by pyrbob
11/29/2012 11:12 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
TheCentMan... Do I get a cookie?   How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
BUT...No one can tell me how this error happened, got me stumped... pyrbob beat me to it, collar counter clash was what I came up with as well. Die was far misaligned and clashed with the collar transfering the dentical design to the top edge of the collar. Then the die was moved closer to where it should be but was still misaligned enough that it again clashed with the collar this time transferring the dentical design from the collar to the portion of the die that created the top of the rim. The die was then properly aligned and creates coins like yours. |
|
Rest in Peace
1988 Posts |
Thanks guys...Now I know what happened to my coin. Earle42..Good one, you can have my cookie...  By the way Earle42, is that a 1965 or 1959 coin now....?....  Edited by wert
11/29/2012 3:40 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
I admit. I cheated (sort of). I have been working (hobby) with graphics/picture manipulation since the late 80s when I had a Commodore AMIGA computer. Its abilities back then were equal to what we have nowadays. Disney used them in making films like Beauty and the Beast since they were the only computers powerful enough to handle the graphics manipulation at the time (dedicated graphics chip built in). Since Commodore was not a computer giant the big boys muscled them out of existence - very sad. We entered a pretty much unknown "dark ages" of computing for around 10-15 years while the other platforms caught up. I admit there are still some things I could do back then that still are not possible as easily and quickly.
BTW - the dime in question looks weird to me in that it almost seems as if the area where Roosevelt's eye is clear - in the center - is moved back too far from the actual fromt of his head. I guess this is b/c whatever squished the OBV must have moved the face forward.
Definitely an interesting looking coin.
|
|
Rest in Peace
1988 Posts |
Good times back then Earle42...Me and my brother-in-law rans a Commodore 64 club, teaching what was back then "basic" programming....Loved computers from then till today...
|
|
Valued Member
United States
162 Posts |
Wert's 2nd image, I couldn't find any photo manipulation, I thought you stumped me! Turns out it had none. Earle, your's was blatantly obvious that it was a photo manip. Why is the lighting/shadowing reversed on the 5? ;) No cookies for anyone. :D
Edited by TheCentMan
11/29/2012 6:07 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
1988 Posts |
ahhhhhh TheCentMan....That is not nice, guess I will have to do a good GIMP make over of a coin and see I can fool you and others... |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
Actually, I altered the pixel shading on the 5 b/c of the hotspot near the 6. When I cut out the 5 and rotated it, I thought (I guess wrongly!) that the light between the 5 and 6 would make the left edge of the 5 darker than right edge.
Oh well - so much for a chocolate chip!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
162 Posts |
Shenanigans! The photoshop police are gonna catch ya wert! Also, to answer your question (about Earle's photo manip), it would be a 1959. No question about it, the lighting/shadows made it too easy. If you're gonna trick me, you better get the lighting/shadowing perfect. :D @Earle: The lighting on the 5 that you rotated is catching to the north-east edges of the coin. On the rest of the coin, the light is catching from the south-west. Also, the shadowing should be on the right side of the numbers, but the number you flipped it's shadowing on the left. Unless there's a magical light that only hits the 5 and nothing else, then it would be impossible to be real.  If it makes you feel any better, the editing you did was spot on but it'd be very hard (I won't say impossible) to edit lighting and shadows perfectly. If you however, took another picture of the same coin, but rotated it 180 degrees (so the lighting was hitting the flipped 5 from the south-west) and cut/pasted the 5 from that image I probably wouldn't be able to tell that it was fake so easily (if even at all). Edited by TheCentMan
11/29/2012 8:49 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
I see what you mean. I was thinking (again - wrongly) exactly like you said - a spot on (well, right between) the 5 and6. But I think (thanks to you) the reason I was thinking of this spotlight-like (and ridiculous now that you pointed it out!) effect was b/c I was zoomed in and focusing only that area of the coin. So my non-rational mind only thought o that area and not the larger pic.  Can I blame the lack of common sense on my meds this time? |
|
New Member
 United States
3 Posts |
I am delighted to see so many people take this so seriously. I was inclined to agree with CaptainFwiffo on the coin/counter/roller explanation except that I would expect to see the reverse side similarly damaged and as you can see, the reverse is in excellent, undamaged condition. And... no, it is not photoshopped, not that it could not be done, I just do not have the skills... or interest.  Doc65 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2738 Posts |
As others have indicated, this coin was toyed with outside the Mint.
Error coin writer and researcher.
|
| |
Replies: 28 / Views: 11,720 |
First Page
Posted 11/29/2012 11:47 am
