One of One? Or, PMD?
newbuddy56258
Posts: 19 ✭
I recently found an interesting 1963-D cent that has a "raised" metal symbol on both sides of the coin. My initial impression was that it was PMD, but after looking much closer under high magnification, I am now unsure. I know that there are examples of PMD where different groups or individuals will use a negative counter-punch on coins to leave a raised image on the coin. However, it has been my understanding that this also leaves evidence of damage around the raised image, where the punch pushes into the metal surface, causing the metal to form up into the negative punch to create the raised image. My coin shows no visible evidence of depressed surface around the image, making it questionable. I've received a lot of feedback on another message board, with the vast majority expressing their opinion that this is PMD. I respect their opinions, but I am still uncertain. If this is PMD, then why is there no visible evidence of metal impression surrounding the image? I've been told by one coin expert that the mint employees will sometimes mark a die for inspection, and produce coins with the mark that are not intended for circulation. Is this true? Might this coin possibly be one of these marked coins that escaped the mint? I will add some images to this post so you can see this for yourself. Thanks in advance for your expert opinions!
Comments
One more thing. I've done extensive searches on the web, trying to find another example of this same image. I have currently found zero images that are even close to this one.
PMD stop posting about the same coin. You already did it in BST.
Proud follower of Christ! I love the USA! Land of the Bright and Beautiful! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
it's finally in the right forum
and someone told him to post here
now to get the picture posting thing sorted out
It’s a post-production alteration, that someone performed on the coin, not an error. There are an infinite number of things that can be done to coins, either intentionally or my happenstance.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Post mint damage
In short: no. This does not happen. If the mint were to deliberately damage or deface a die because it failed an inspection, it would simply be destroyed; they wouldn't carve ampersands on it and then strike coins with it.
And if, hypothetically it did happen, then a "mark" carved or stamped onto a die would create a raised mark on the coin, not an indented one. To create an indent on a coin by modifying a die is surprisingly difficult, as you would have to "add material" somehow to the die's surface in such a way that it wouldn't simply fall off or flatten. No, by far the easiest way to make something like this is with a hammer, a punch, and a perfectly normal coin. Very often, someone gets themselves a nice shiny new letter-punch kit and decides to try it out on the first piece of metal they get their hands on; a coin is often the handiest piece of metal they have to hand.
Because a well-braced punch applies downwards force only on the area directly underneath the punch. this will displace the metal, but downwards, pushing "out" the metal on the opposite side of the coin. Which is indeed what we see here, with a flattened spot on the memorial, opposite/underneath where the punch on Abe's face landed.
Get yourself a metal punch, a big hammer, and a bronze penny you don't care about, and test it out for yourself. It's relatively easy to recreate.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded the DPOTD twice.
There is a flat area visible on the reverse in the vicinity of the design, and probably one on the obverse, as well.
I created something roughly similar once. Punch a letter into soft steel, place the coin over the punched area, place a somewhat soft material such as a piece of wood on the coin and strike it with a hammer. The force will drive the coin's surface into the punched design.
That's the basic concept. There are undoubtedly other ways of doing the same thing.
Et cetera…
Thank you all for your comments. I am humbled by your expertise.
Most likely a counterstamp, which is PMD; doesn't add extra value but is interesting nonetheless.
"Another day, another Collectors Universe forum scrolling session."
- Someone, probably
Rather than being humbled, learn from it by studying the minting process and what errors can occur, these post mint marks are way too common. Error site: https://www.error-ref.com/error_and_variety_check_list/
@Sapyx
I do appreciate your response, and I have been convinced that this is PMD. But, I do want to make one correction to your observation. This symbol in not "indented", as you implied in your remarks. If you look closely at both the close-ups of the symbols on both the obverse and the reverse, you can clearly see that both symbols are "raised", not indented. This is why I was questioning it. Nevertheless, thank you for providing your feedback. I sincerely appreciate it. Cheers. :-)
I noticed that it looked raised, then convinced myself that it wasn’t. JBK is on the right track. That is no ordinary alteration.
Scarcer than a 1909-S VDB.
i can't explain how it got there but it wasn't from the mint
If you're still trying to convince people that the ampersand is raised, those pictures aren't helping you.
Lighting is coming from above on the date. If the "&" is raised, lighting is coming from the bottom. How does that work?
There is light coming from multiple directions. I will take better close-up photos and post them. I am not arguing with anyone's opinions here. I have examined this coin very closely, and the symbols are definitely raised, even though the photos I posted have, in some cases, indicate otherwise. These marks may not have come from the mint. I get that. The symbols, though very similar, also appear to be slightly different on each side of the coin. If you compare them side by side, you can see minor differences, indicating they may not have been made by the same tool. I will do my best to take better photos. It is just very interesting to me, even if this isn't a treasure.
The lighting on "LIBERTY" and the date is the same, but on the "&" symbol (if it's raised) it's different. How does that happen?
Well, after re-checking the coin under the microscope, I am eating crow. You were all correct and my assertion that the symbols were raised was incorrect. I was definitely fooled by an optical illusion. Thanks everyone for your kind input and remarks. I'm sorry if I wasted your time. The symbols are definitely PMD.
It's easy for that to happen when an unexpected feature is found on a coin. If you really want to see "confusing" when looking at an image, check out the 1964 10 zlotych from Poland (Y52.1 & Y52.2)- same design, the legends are raised on one and incuse on the other.