There is a 1958 DDO... but it is a significant one with clear separations (Check the CPG Vol. 1).... Your cent just appears to be well worn... perhaps a touch of machine doubling...Cheers, RickO
Hi, Deniss222. It's hard to tell from the photos, but I think the odd look of the lettering is from some kind of polishing process. The surfaces, in the reverse pictures especially, look unnaturally reflective. Whatever was done to this cent, it flattened and distorted the lettering. There may have been some wear and/or machine doubling as well, prior to being polished.
"Render therfore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." Matthew 22: 21
I agree this looks very worn. My first thought was that it was whizzed. I guess I could back off to any other sort or mechanical polishing device. Based on the wheat ear visible in the original pics, it appears that the coin started off VF or lower.
Sure, better pictures of the full obverse and reverse wouldn't hurt.
I'm more interested in the OP's comment that it looks uncirculated to him, since I see about six things in these pictures that tell me otherwise. I'd love to have the OP walk us through his reasoning: "An uncirculated coin must have A, B, and C. In the pictures you can see A here, B there, and C over there. An uncirculated coin must not have X, Y, or Z. Those are clearly not present in the pictures."
The same approach would be useful when considering errors and varieties: "A genuine doubled die must have..." "A genuine clip must have..."
Of course it helps to have the right definitions. You don't want to point to an animal that waddles and oinks and conclude that it must be a duck...
Comments
There is a 1958 DDO... but it is a significant one with clear separations (Check the CPG Vol. 1).... Your cent just appears to be well worn... perhaps a touch of machine doubling...Cheers, RickO
thank you but this coin look like uncirculated ..thanks Ricko
Hi, Deniss222. It's hard to tell from the photos, but I think the odd look of the lettering is from some kind of polishing process. The surfaces, in the reverse pictures especially, look unnaturally reflective. Whatever was done to this cent, it flattened and distorted the lettering. There may have been some wear and/or machine doubling as well, prior to being polished.
You would have to post pics of the whole coin, but it looks very worn and then polished.
ditto
BHNC #203
I agree this looks very worn. My first thought was that it was whizzed. I guess I could back off to any other sort or mechanical polishing device. Based on the wheat ear visible in the original pics, it appears that the coin started off VF or lower.
Sure, better pictures of the full obverse and reverse wouldn't hurt.
I'm more interested in the OP's comment that it looks uncirculated to him, since I see about six things in these pictures that tell me otherwise. I'd love to have the OP walk us through his reasoning: "An uncirculated coin must have A, B, and C. In the pictures you can see A here, B there, and C over there. An uncirculated coin must not have X, Y, or Z. Those are clearly not present in the pictures."
The same approach would be useful when considering errors and varieties: "A genuine doubled die must have..." "A genuine clip must have..."
Of course it helps to have the right definitions. You don't want to point to an animal that waddles and oinks and conclude that it must be a duck...
Sorry Deniss222 but the 1958 lincoln in your photos is not even close to being the DDO. Go on line and check it out for yourself.
thank you I will post new pix ..Thank you
What's going on with the R in trust?
tell me ..
president and letters it seems like split from the coin !