| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,273 |
|
|
New Member
United States
4 Posts |
i can't seem to shrink the whole coin to under 100kb--here is the date under a magnifier. the coin is worn from circulation and has some pitting. I can send a larger photo to an email.   *** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***Edited by silversteve
01/01/2013 11:14 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
Welcome to CCF!
A pic of the full coin obverse and reverse would be nice.
Use the image optimizer
Edited by amida17
01/01/2013 10:40 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
|
|
New Member
 United States
4 Posts |
yeah, the image optimizer is STILL running since I sent the small photo.
i realize the walker was not minted till 1916, thats why I'm here.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
Pics will be crucial. There is no Judd (pattern coin) listed.
|
|
New Member
United States
4 Posts |
got it--added the full photo
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1659 Posts |
Welcome to CCF!
The large space between the 9 and the second 1 leads me to believe it is probably a 1945 in which the 4 has been altered to appear as a 1.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
 altered date. |
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
I agree. Look at the spacing between the 9 and the "1".
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
615 Posts |
I cast my vote for an altered date as well.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
168 Posts |
Pattern coinage for the WLH was dated 1916. That coin looks like an altered 1945.
|
|
New Member
United States
4 Posts |
well,that would make more sense than a pattern coin out in circulation for so long--pretty good job (under magnification)
thank you vermon,amida and cyb
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4416 Posts |
There's another possibility ... Might it be a lead, cast copy? Check the weight.
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,273 |
|
Posted 01/01/2013 10:40 pm
