| Author |
 Replies: 28 / Views: 6,531 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2740 Posts |
Bill, most cases of Machine Doubling are indeed minor and quite acceptable to mint personnel. However, in a few cases it is quite exaggerated so that the design is visibly distorted. This would not be acceptable to mint personnel. You can find some examples in this article: http://www.minterrornews.com/news-1...oubling.htmlAs to the difference between "die variety" and "mint error" there is no consensus. Everyone would agree that doubled dies, repunched mintmarks, repunched dates, etc. are die varieties. Beyond that there is no agreement. Fellows like Ken Potter would include any die anomaly (e.g., excessive die abrasion, die cracks, clashed dies, die damage, etc.) while James Wiles would call these "die errors". Error coin writer and researcher.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Well, I actually completely disagree that eject doubling cannot be determined as such. It's actually easy to tell the difference, since the doubling occurs as a lifting of the metal and causes a fin along the high ridge of the affected devices. It also has a distinct scooting effect along the doubling that is not present with Strike Doubling. Additionally, it does not show the details of the field in the doubling. I have never had a problem telling the two apart. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Quote:
some things we as a group call errors are indeed errors, if we take the decisions of this author and numismatist to heart. Alan Herbert does not lump all of those items on your list under the a broad category called "errors". |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1807 Posts |
Quote:
since the doubling occurs as a lifting of the metal and causes a fin along the high ridge of the affected devices. Got any examples to share or a place to look? Thanks |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2740 Posts |
Coppercoins says, "Well, I actually completely disagree that eject doubling cannot be determined as such. It's actually easy to tell the difference, since the doubling occurs as a lifting of the metal and causes a fin along the high ridge of the affected devices. It also has a distinct scooting effect along the doubling that is not present with Strike Doubling. Additionally, it does not show the details of the field in the doubling. I have never had a problem telling the two apart." You are laboring under a misconception that ejection is solely responsible for the effect you describe. It can also be caused by a die that slides laterally after it reaches its lowest point. In fact, all the most extreme cases occur on the obverse face and seem to be caused by hammer die movement. Look at the half dollar in the article I linked to. Note that the obverse die was misaligned in the direction opposite to the direction of die movement that caused the design smearing. Similar (if less dramatic) effects can occur as the result of a slight shift of the anvil die. Error coin writer and researcher.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5640 Posts |
Steve, I did not state that all the things on "the list" are Errors, please re-read the post especially the part that reads, " I see where Alan Herbert discusses the Planchet-Die-Striking Error Identification system, where he states that Any error or variety on dies that shows up on the coins," The terms" any Error or Variety". I did not want to confuse anyone, I do believe the words I used were not saying all of these things were Errors.....  ps: If you would like I can supply you with the source of this information....Be Well, Mike |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
I have a book where Herbert discusses the PDS system, thank you...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5640 Posts |
Where did everyone go? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Mike, I can see where there are degrees of Machine Doubling that can go way beyond the small stuff we see. I have to dig more deeply into the article that you led me too. There are some truly interesting examples and scenarios there. As for the terminology:-) They should lock a bunch of us up in a room and then not let us out again until we can formulate a consensus as to the uses of terms. If we beat it around a little bit, we may be able to get something consistent out of it. I understand how everyone has their own slant on the terms we use and they lean towards their own slant. Somehow I sense that there is potential to do some great good for the hobby if we can get to a point of agreement on some things. Thanks, Bill |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Hi, One thing to mention but not in a way that takes anything away from Alan Herbert, is that he was a pioneer with respect to errors and die varieties. Some folks are reading books that were written before many of the other folks got into the field such as Mike D., Chuck.D, Ken P. James W. and Guys like Fivaz, Stanton, Wexler, Flynn, and the list goes on. I hesitate to add my name to that list but I humbly will. There has been quite a lot of new information that is not represented in some of the older literature that is out there. As an example in another field: Some of you know I work with Parrots. There are books that were printed in the 1940s that were reprinted in the 1960s and reprinted again with the same information in the 1980s and 1990s. The people who wrote the books are dead. The information is completely wrong based upon what we know today about parrots yet on a nearly daily basis, I am explaining away some of the bad information found in those books to someone who nearly killed their bird. The point is that some coin information although not all, has changed dramatically over the past "X" number of years. Some of the publications, particularly books have not changed accordingly. Take for example modern digital hub and die cutting that is used at the Philadelphia Mint. It has essentially made much of what is read in older books on the subjects of coin design and the preparation of hubs and dies obsolete yet people explaining the minting processes still think a Janvier reducing lathe is in use. Heck, people still ask me how to get Mint bags of 5000 cents from their local banks because they read about it in a publishers "newer" version of a book that is an unedited rehash of an old book. You can't get mint sewn bags anymore. I think it was in 1999 or so that that those bags became obsolete. There are still some people out there that look at the 1997 doubled ear cent as a novelty and not a doubled die because an early CherryPickers' Guide mentions a "well placed die chip" theory. Anyway....there is a great deal of updating needed in our segment of the hobby. OK...enough:-) have Fun, Bill |
|
Valued Member
United States
93 Posts |
Excellent point Bill. As history will show, there will be new people, new blood to come forth and reinvent the hobby again, to write new books on the subject not rewrite the old. The list of people you mentioned, including yourself, did it as did the generation before you and one before them. It's inevitable. That's why I'm a firm believer that the experts, the Yodas mentioned in your post not only be recognized for there research and discoveries but each one should be a mentor to the next generation, not just in a generic sense thru books written, but hands on, eye to eye if possible. Passing the torch on so to speak.
Finally, I have done away with almost all my books because a lap top next to my search area allows me instant access to volumes of information and pictures that I didn't have before. It's so much better and quicker than having 5 ot 6 books open, spread all over while researching a couple of varieties. And, you will see a new language for the hobby arise out of the internet by the thousands who converse with each other on forums, auction sites etc. I see it now.
Rock
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5640 Posts |
Bill, point well taken. I am guilty of doing some research and trying to sort out the "Facts", that said, If it were not for people like Chuck, Mike, yourself, Bio, Coop,and others, I would be completely dizzy and left wondering. I read as much as I can and then balance out(or try)",What is available," and what makes sense to me, this is not an easy undertaking.I would also like to see that some day, near the present, the "Experts" come upon an understanding or mutual agreement as to the direction of things to come and then people like myself would grasp the differences and "Facts" in a more defined and updated understanding, Is this possible?... |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Anything is possible:-)
The world of coins is, although at a more leisurely pace, like the world of computers. Some of the basic principles will always remain the same and will not become obsolete, while some things can change every four to six months. What we find today can make the last theory on a subject obsolete immediately upon discovery but the literature, especially in book form takes awhile to catch up.
I remember when the big thing was that doubled dies couldn't happen on coins made with single squeeze hubbing technology. Then many of us started to find them. Now they are everywhere. All the doubled knees and doubled columns on Lincolns should not be possible according to what was presented as fact early on in. We are now finding doubled dies that look like the traditional doubled dies with notches and splits on lettering and details. Some even have some pretty decent spreads. What was impossible became possible once a few of us who are in the die variety segment of the hobby began to see these things with our own eyes.
Have Fun,
Bill
Edited by foundinrolls
05/05/2009 7:09 pm
|
| |
Replies: 28 / Views: 6,531 |
First Page
Posted 05/04/2009 11:24 am
