Consultation: Please... Jefferson Error

Snoodle

I have an unusual Jefferson nickel circa 1955-ish that I would like to share with the group. I have a photo of the obverse(320kb) and one of the reverese(460kb). I do not know how to attach a file that large and I don't have a website I can upload my pics to for a Link. Can anyone help out?

The History: My father received this coin in change at the grocery store before he was old enough to drive. (Legally) He was born in 1942. The coin looks to be an "indent" error. The reverse is normal. The obverse is not.

Thank you.

ddbird

First..shrink em down to 50kb or less...then go to testing forum...click attachments, browse for image, upload, then click on uploaded image...click "view image", right click on image and click properties, then copy the URL it has posted, start a new thread here, click the image button on top, and copy the URL! Youll get teh hang of it!

If its in a photo program...i think you can send the image to a file at a smaller size...other than that I dont know how to shrink the image!

***Export is what im thinking of....normally when you send a coin, it asks for demensions, this is how you shrink the incredible shrinking coin***

Snoodle

I think I got it. The incredible shrinking coin!

ddbird

Cool!

airplanenut

From those pics, it looks like it may be a capped die--if so, VERY cool (and valuable) error!

Snoodle

The thing that really intrigues me is the fact that you can see both Jefferson and Monticello on the obverse. Jefferson looks to be over the top of Monticello. The relief is such that both images are proud of the fields on the coin, not incused.

cladking

Interesting coin.

Apparently the cap was getting so thin that the obverse was beginning to bleed through.

It's surprising the edges of the cap were so thick where they wrapped around the die as
evidenced by the very high rims on the obverse.

jtwax

Your coin is struck by a capped die. Since the Mint mark is on the reverse we know that it was minted in 1964-D or before. Too bad the date doesn't peek through a bit. It is certainly a nice error and probably worth from $20 to $50 in BU with no date and more if you can pinpoint the date.

errormaven

Yes, it is a capped die strike. It's normal for a raised "ghost" of Jefferson to bleed through the thin metal of the cap. It's much rarer for an incuse "ghost" of Monticello to bleed through the thick planchet. However, I've seen at least two capped die strike with this unsual effect. I really can't explain it.

Snoodle

I need to thank all of you for helping out. I do appreciate it.

Is this a coin that should be submitted for grading? If so, where does one send an error coin for authentication/grading?

TonedCoinTrader

ANACS is Great with errors.

Scott

cladking

The Monticello on the "obverse" is the reverse of the die cap. The cap was a normally
struck coin before it adhered to the upper (obverse) die and began to wrap arond it from
spreading caused by successive strikes. The first strikes from a capped die will often have
a very clear image of the reverse (in mirror image). Normally this image will lose relief and
spread very quickly.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH

Nice coin indeed. Full obverse brockage. Can you see the date?

Snoodle

I can't see the date clearly, but it looks to be a 1948-S. Maybe a '46.

LUCKOFTHEIRISH

send it in for grading perhaps they can tell???????

errormaven

I must reiterate that the faint, incuse image of Monticello is NOT a brockage. It is much too indistinct. An unexpanded brockage of Monticello should be far clearer. This is, instead, a "ghost" image from the reverse die.

As far as grading services go, I have no special recommendations. There's no telling what sort of description you'll get back from the "Big Three".

errormaven

Because it's hard to fathom a ghost image bleeding through a thick planchet, here's another possibility. It's possible that the reverse face of the die cap picked up a blurred image of Monticello when it struck a rolled-thin or split planchet just prior to the strike that generated this coin. This is admittedly a stretch, but it's possible.

All I'm sure of is this is not a brockage. A brockage, especially one that shows little or no expansion, should have much sharper outlines and details. An unexpanded brockage should also not be associated with a strong, raised ghost image of Jefferson. A strong ghost image of Jefferson indicates that the floor of the cap was already thin at the time the coin was struck. Any original raised image of Monticello that was present on the reverse should be greatly expanded or obliterated by this point.

It is possible for a late-stage die cap to pick up a fresh impression of Monticello by striking the reverse die directly (a "clashed cap strike"). However, once again, the brockage, though incomplete, should have clear borders and details.

cladking

<< <i>I must reiterate that the faint, incuse image of Monticello is NOT a brockage. It is much too indistinct. An unexpanded brockage of Monticello should be far clearer. This is, instead, a "ghost" image from the reverse die.

>>



Good point.

ttt