The 1954-S has the mintmark placed high, and if touching the numeral '5' may be considered an error. Though not likely to have much value as collector interest is probably not very high.
The 1958-D seems to have a higher mintmark also, but if not touching the date not that unusual. The 1957-D, I do not see anything that would indicate an error to me.
Prior to 1989, Mint marks were punched into working dies by hand. The location of the 58D and 54S are considered part of the normal variation and not errors.
The 57D may have some minor mechanical doubling or die deterioration doubling (can't see anything else that a new collector might think is different). MD and DDD aren't considered errors. You can read a good explanation by clicking on the "Worthless Doubling" tab at www.doubled die.com
In the future, please point out the area you think is different, so members don't have to guess. Remember, its not easy finding errors, even minor ones, but there are lots of things that can make a coin look different
In the future, it might help all involved if you could point out what you believe to be errors on a coin in the initial post. It just helps us all in that we don't have to guess.
@tincup said:
The 1954-S has the mintmark placed high, and if touching the numeral '5' may be considered an error. Though not likely to have much value as collector interest is probably not very high.
The 1958-D seems to have a higher mintmark also, but if not touching the date not that unusual. The 1957-D, I do not see anything that would indicate an error to me.
Wouldn't that be considered a die variety, not an error?
I am not an error expert. But I do have advice that I have given before and is based on advice that I have seen given by those who are experts. When looking at coins for errors, it's best to not work backwards. Meaning do not look at a coin and try to see what is the error. Instead, know what error is possible and look for it. And that way you will have ideas about probability and value as well as countless written and visual guides.
Owlx
Posts: 226 ✭✭
Answers
@Owlx .... Those appear to be normal cents... what exactly do you think could be an error? Cheers, RickO
I can’t remember the exact term for that shadow effect but it’s part of the striking process and isn’t an error.
TurtleCat Gold Dollars
The 1954-S has the mintmark placed high, and if touching the numeral '5' may be considered an error. Though not likely to have much value as collector interest is probably not very high.
The 1958-D seems to have a higher mintmark also, but if not touching the date not that unusual. The 1957-D, I do not see anything that would indicate an error to me.
Prior to 1989, Mint marks were punched into working dies by hand. The location of the 58D and 54S are considered part of the normal variation and not errors.
The 57D may have some minor mechanical doubling or die deterioration doubling (can't see anything else that a new collector might think is different). MD and DDD aren't considered errors. You can read a good explanation by clicking on the "Worthless Doubling" tab at www.doubled die.com
In the future, please point out the area you think is different, so members don't have to guess. Remember, its not easy finding errors, even minor ones, but there are lots of things that can make a coin look different
I was thinking maybe becouse the mint marks is double or becouse there in the wrong place touching other devices .
There is nothing there that would command any premium over face value.
In the future, it might help all involved if you could point out what you believe to be errors on a coin in the initial post. It just helps us all in that we don't have to guess.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
This has be touted as a “contiguous mintmark”. Some try to market this as some type of rare error. It’s not.
Wouldn't that be considered a die variety, not an error?
Ok what about this one
I am not an error expert. But I do have advice that I have given before and is based on advice that I have seen given by those who are experts. When looking at coins for errors, it's best to not work backwards. Meaning do not look at a coin and try to see what is the error. Instead, know what error is possible and look for it. And that way you will have ideas about probability and value as well as countless written and visual guides.
I realize that some people start their weekend early and I have no problem with that......... But on MONDAY?