1956 Proof Dime - Extreme MD Or Error?

Yep! It's MD.

Thanks for your guys' responses.. Was hoping maybe I missed one. haha. I actually never noticed that above the I - I appreciate the catch! I double checked under the scope and it looks like just a very faint mark on the surface (not raised or indented). But certainly looks like a die crack in the photo! Great eye!

I agree with coop, there is a lot of glare, but some Machine Doubling as well. Nice coin!

to the CCF!

Good Morning and thank you for your responses. I do agree that the lighting I have for my scope exaggerates the die flow lines to make it appear more doubled than it is. But I'm not sure if it is as exaggerated as you might think. I pulled the coin out, along with another proof and took images under magnification with the same magnification, lighting, and no editing except to reduce the file sizes.. I didn't have time to find another '56 because I'm working (from home) but I can do so later if it'll help get a better idea! The third photo is the coin's image taken upside down with the same settings, etc., not just a rotated image.

I believe my scope does have multiple small LEDs for lighting - I can't justify purchasing another scope at the moment.. What do you suggest to cut down on the glare? I've tried turing the scope's light off and using a single light source nearby but it does not give enough light even though it is a 100w equivilent LED full size bulb with a thin light shade. I'm still trying tune in on coin photography - most photos I take is with a Canon EOS-R with a Macro EFS 35mm lense that takes very good close-ups but does not capture the representation of the coin as well as I'd like it to. This is probably for another thread though so I'll jump into that forum if needed!