| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 2,722 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3331 Posts |
Coop those sites have strong shadows on the areas where the serifs should be. However, as I mentioned above, I was able to lighten Wexler a bit and there may be a serif - unfortunately it was not conclusive.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I have been a bit puzzled by this RPM. The issue for me is not the value of the coin - I think, at most, it may be $5. I simply enjoy the challenge of attribution. I was thinking that I might send it to Wexler, but then I decided that it would really not be worth the cost. Then I started thinking: Perhaps I do not properly understand the procedure for the hand punched mint marks, so I hope someone will set me straight!  This mint mark has the vertical protrusion at the top right side - the same as that of 048. What are the probabilities that this would occur on 2 separate punchings on 2 different dies in exactly the same repunching? It seems to me that the probabilities of that are infinitesimally small. So I am led back again to the point where I am more convinced that this is 048. It would be nice to see a photo of a confirmed 048 where the area of the serifs is not completely obscured by dark shadows. I have not found such a photo and it apparently it does not exist! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2775 Posts |
Pete, I wanted to confirm, because both show this RPM as a D/D North East. Not a D/D/D North East.
Are you looking at the location of the secondary MM properly? Are you seeing the faint MM to the North East on yours as pictured or seen on Wexlers? Follow the arrows pointing the MM out. Thanks, Doug.
Follow up - if it has the MM to the North East and split serifs wouldn't that make it a D/D/D?
Edited by Halo1st
10/18/2016 09:45 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
Strange that the other 2 sites do not show what Wexler is indicating? I do not see it on my coin either. I have been focusing on the protrusion above and the direction of the die flow lines.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I am about to decide that Coop is correct about 048 not having split serifs. Looking again at the coppercoins image, I cannot see any trace of a split. I have sent Wexler a note asking about the 048 on his listing, but have not heard back.
My coin has the protrusion on the upper right and the same flow lines shown by Wexler. The splits on the serifs on my coin are not terribly pronounced. CONECA does not show a listing for Stage A. Could it be that this is Stage A and that by Stage B and after, the splits have worn away? Is that possible? Is that discussed anywhere in the literature?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Stage 'A' is usually the EDS example. The Splits would be the strongest on that die state. But they never wear away. The are raised on the die, but in an area that is semi-deep in the die. So they may alter a bit, but going away, I doubt it. Unlike the missing RPM lines, they are deeper into the die.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
790 Posts |
Coop, you must have a LOT of error pennies to get all those great photos!! I love them. So informative.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Not all images I use are from my camera. I use a lot from other sources and even here I may use the other members images to show an educational point. But knowing where to get the images was always hard until I found a great source will all the image I need in 6,000 pixel width. They work great and learning more everyday. This hobby has no ends of limits of what you can find or search to find new things.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I just heard from Wexler. He tells me that none of the examples/images he has show split serifs for 048. Coop is certainly correct about this one. I am still puzzled with the way the mint mark position and protrusion from the top of the mint mark seem to match 048.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It just has the same RPM plus the split serifs, but with a different die. So instead of a D/D, You have a D/D/D.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
Quote:
It just has the same RPM plus the split serifs Is anyone aware of any other RPMs where the same RPM appears on a 2nd die? I have not heard of this happening and I have difficulty understanding. The way I understand the creation of an RPM is that the punch is placed on the die by hand and struck with a hammer. The impression is then visually inspected and, if not satisfactory, the process is repeated. If the second application of the punch is not exactly in the indention of the first application, then an RPM is created. For the exact same RPM to be created on 2 different dies would require a most astonishing coincidence! I guess it could happen... Then on this coin, a third application of the punch occurred thus creating a D/D/D. I know there are examples of very similar mint marks on separate dies - similar in very minor features. The instance with this coin requires the second die mint mark to have the same feature of the protrusion - which I would not call minor. I am aware of one example of a major feature of an RPM being repeated on a second die. That is 1961D-1MM-038 and 039. So I guess it is possible! Pardon my rambling here - I think better when I think "out loud" - it is a sympton of sinility! I would enjoy hearing any other comments anyone else has on this subject! Maybe  ? Probably!! Edited by Pete2226
10/23/2016 05:41 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Edited by coop
10/23/2016 8:14 pm
|
| |
Replies: 27 / Views: 2,722 |
First Page
Posted 10/18/2016 08:29 am
