1949-s ddo 1-o-iii, 1do-001

[ray_parkhurst]

1949-S DDO 1-O-III, 1DO-001

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0201_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0202_01.jpg

http://i943.photobucket.com/albums/ad273/rparkhurst/IMG_0201_02.jpg

[jcuve]

I hope you don't mind, but I was just working on this 1949-S DDO-001 Class III diagram today and thought I would post it here.

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww322/jcuve/49-48-overlay02ccopy.jpg

[coop]

I figured that one out a few years back.

[ray_parkhurst]

Jason...not sure what you are implying with your overlay...that the coin is a 49/48? But the point on the 1948 is not as sharp as the first impression on the 1949. I've seen examples of both small and large 4's (or perhaps sharp and blunt?) on 1949-S so both types were minted. I've always thought of this variety as a small over large 4. Please further explain your reasoning...Ray

PS...by the way, I just posted a 1951-S along with 1951-D/S at same magnification on the One Variety a Day #2 thread. After seeing it more clearly, I think the 1951-D/S is actually a 1951-D/inverted-S. maybe you could do an overlay of this? And would love to learn the overlay procedure! ...Ray

[coppercoins]

I have never once seen a 1949 cent intentionally minted with a pointed 4. I would like to see that.

[ray_parkhurst]

As I remember it was a proof-like obverse die. I'm looking for an example...Ray

[jcuve]

These are listed as a Class III - two different designed hubs. The prevailing hypothesis is that for whatever reason a '48 hub had the 8 removed and somehow ended up being used in one hubbing on three dies - those dies all received another hubbing from a normal '49 hub. I suppose it is possible that there was a different styled '49 hub, only used three times.

This is the same illustration with an updated EDS '49 DDO-001 that I used to illustrate Class III hub doubling for Billy Crawford's (now closed) monthly die variety news column.

The overlay I used was a 4 from a '48 - and it fits flawlessly on the three '49-S DDOs. There is also doubling in LIBERTY but not all that evident in your pictures. I would not rule out a 1949 floating around that was hubbed with a pointed 4 (and not a doubled die), but just as Chuck, I have yet to see one.

[ray_parkhurst]

When I started my "One Variety a Day" series I had not seen the Variety Examples sub-forum and the excellent documentation being shown for the varieties. My impetus was that most detailed variety photo studies I've seen don't show the whole coin, and I personally like to see the whole coin and how the variety looks as if you were viewing through a low-power microscope. To show the specific variety I just did 100% crops around the relevant details. In order to conform to the high standards being shown on this sub-forum, I'm going to have to do some specific high-magnification imaging on the variety details. I'll backfill the ones I've already posted, and then add relevant details to the new posts.

I'm still looking for that 49-S with pointed 4. Hope my memory is correct...

Ray

[jcuve]

Here are some close ups, markers and MM position for DDO-001 (1DO-003).

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww322/jcuve/1949SDDO-001a.jpg

[jallengomez]

Ray-

Thank you for these threads. I've often been frustrated by the lack of full coin shots by variety sites. Just show me the damned coin with excellent photos, and I won't need you to spell out the markers for me. This is an EXCELLENT idea, and I'm glad you're doing it.

Jody

[mustbebob]

I've often been frustrated by the lack of full coin shots by variety sites. Just show me the damned coin with excellent photos, and I won't need you to spell out the markers for me

I'm a little confused by your statement Jody. I don't think you realize the importance of what we do when you say things like this. Just how frustrated are you because the variety sites don't show a full coin shot? If I am showing you a coin on my variety site, what good does a full coin shot do?
We will use this coin as an example. There are 3 varieties listed that are almost identical. Could you attribute your coin easier with a full coin shot, or marker photos? If we were to have awesome photos like Ray has here, can you imagine the bandwidth and size of the site? Just asking Jody. We try to take all comments seriously, and use feedback to make things better. I am just having a hard time grasping what you are trying to say.

[coppercoins]

Wow, I was thinking the exact - EXACT - same thing before I flipped to page 2 and saw Bob's post.

Full-coin shots are actually useless for identifying die varieties unless they are thousands and thousands of pixels in size (to get the tiny details) and lit in a completely unrealistic way to have the light ride JUST RIGHT over the minute little scratches and cracks that define the markers of a die variety. Basically you would have to have micro-lighting that can be pointed in various directions only affecting small areas of the surface of the coin. Completely unrealistic.

I would challenge anyone here who thinks they can do better than we do with 'whole coin shots' on some of the minor, nearly indistinct die varieties that absolutely REQUIRE die marker images for proper identification. Put it to a vote. I am certain you will find your attitude about wanting full coin shots instead of marker photos that center in on very small areas of the coin to be way off the charts in the minority. Why? Because they are simply useless.

I'd rather have a whole coin shot than no photos at all, but in 30 years of doing this and 15 years of taking photos of coins through microscopes I can very adamantly state that anyone who prefers shots of the entire coin OVER detailed marker photos really doesn't understand the point and purpose of the marker photos.

I can, however, understand the point in having them IN ADDITION TO the marker photos, but coppercoins is simply not structured that way. It took everything I had to be able to afford a server with enough space to accommodate the thousands of marker photos I saw as necessary. I didn't have enough space to accommodate "fluff" - and whole coin shots in a die variety identification guide are definitely that - fluff. Please remember that when I started coppercoins, over 50% of the internet was dial-up, most people had 800 pixel resolution on CRT screens, and disk space on the internet ran about $10 for every 40Mb. It wasn't like things are now. Google didn't exist. Facebook didn't exist. Heck, Firefox and Chrome didn't exist. I started coppercoins on a pentium I, 150mHz computer and a 14.4K dial-up modem. You go back to those standards at those costs and do better.

This really points back to a statement I heard a lot when I was a kid - "If you can't do what someone else did better than they did it, enjoy what they did and respect them for doing it." I'm not saying this to be boastful, mean, crass, or otherwise offensive, but I would challenge ANYONE to put in the time, effort, money, and passion to build a BETTER Lincoln cent die variety identification website than what we have at coppercoins. I can tell you already that nobody will, because there's very little money in it, there's never a 'completion date', the equipment to do it is expensive, the code and database knowledge required to do it are very expensive if you don't know it and do it yourself, and it's a real buttload of hard work.

[ray_parkhurst]

...
Full-coin shots are actually useless for identifying die varieties unless they are thousands and thousands of pixels in size (to get the tiny details) and lit in a completely unrealistic way to have the light ride JUST RIGHT over the minute little scratches and cracks that define the markers of a die variety. ...
...
I can, however, understand the point in having them IN ADDITION TO the marker photos
...

I certainly did not expect controversy when posting these! As I said earlier, my impetus in showing these full-coin shots was to document what the variety looks like under a low-power scope, not to replace detailed marker photos. I do all my initial searching with a 10x microscope, and the 800x800 pixel images I have been posting have a net magnification of 11.3x on my 24" monitor, so are pretty close to what I view on the scope. Outside of the variety hobby, most folks will say that if you can't see the variety at this magnification, why bother with it? As a variety specialist, I don't agree, and have gone to great lengths to take detailed photos of extreme minutiae, but I still see value in the overall photos for the reasons stated above, and don't see them as "useless" or "fluff". In fact, 10x magnification is enough to show some of the larger die markers such as chips, breaks, gouges, clashes, scratches, etc as well as surface finish effects such as die polish, major die wear, "orange peel", etc. I find it useful to see all these at one time in the context of the whole coin.

Ray

[jallengomez]

I'm a little confused by your statement Jody. I don't think you realize the importance of what we do when you say things like this. Just how frustrated are you because the variety sites don't show a full coin shot? If I am showing you a coin on my variety site, what good does a full coin shot do?
We will use this coin as an example. There are 3 varieties listed that are almost identical. Could you attribute your coin easier with a full coin shot, or marker photos? If we were to have awesome photos like Ray has here, can you imagine the bandwidth and size of the site? Just asking Jody. We try to take all comments seriously, and use feedback to make things better. I am just having a hard time grasping what you are trying to say.

Bob,

I realize the importance of the shots that you show, and I realize that they are excellent photos. I wasn't saying that. When I said, "excellent" full coin shots that was just an acknowledgement of how good they would have to be in order to be of any use. I was thinking shots like Ray's or like PCGS uses in its "Coinfacts" section for it's examples of graded coins. I personally would like to see that, but that's just my own wish list. Others might not give it a moments thought. As a matter of fact, I could be the only one crazy enough to want to pick up die markers from a full coin image. I don't even think it would be up for a legitimate debate that Coppercoins is hands down the best site out there, so don't take my (perhaps neurotic) wish list as anything but that: a personal wish list. And honestly, when I wrote the statement, it was born about more by my frustration at Coneca for having zero images(I had just finished trying to identify a class 6 DDR).

Jody

[mustbebob]

Ray and Jodi, First of all, what was said in the beginning and what is being said now, is two different things. If you look at your quote on my last post Jodi, I am sure you can understand where I was coming from. Of course you are entitled to your wish list, and of course the photos here are excellent examples of what can be done by someone who loves what they do. However, the particular statement of
I've often been frustrated by the lack of full coin shots by variety sites. Just show me the damned coin with excellent photos, and I won't need you to spell out the markers for me seemed like a direct attack on all variety sites. Granted; we list a lot more, and show a lot more than any variety site out there, and this is primarily for a single denomination.
I will not wander too far away from Ray's initial post. those are outstanding photos, and they are a credit to his expertise. By all means, continue posting away! It might be beneficial to put all them into an online photo album(if you haven't already done so). That way there, we can have access to all of them without trying to search out different threads. Either way, thank you both fro your clarifications.

[thecentcollector]

And honestly, when I wrote the statement, it was born about more by my frustration at Coneca for having zero images(I had just finished trying to identify a class 6 DDR).

Technically, this is what the $30 e-book is for (from CONECA)

[mustbebob]

Technically, this is what the $30 e-book is for (from CONECA)

Good point Andrew. I must also point out that the other variety clubs are making an effort to assign photos to some of their variety listings. The problem is that they deal with multiple denominations, and that is a project that will never be completed. We also have the advantage at coppercoins that we have been doing this on line for well over 10 years. I will not knock anyone else and their effort to keep us all informed. Whether it is a printed or E book, or using the internet, that is what we want...isn't it?

[jallengomez]

Technically, this is what the $30 e-book is for (from CONECA)

(1)I have the e-books. (2)They don't have an e-book for memorials. (3) E-books(or any book for that matter) are virtually outdated as soon as they are created.

[Coppertop]

As mentioned before alot of the other databases have been around for a bit. It can be frustrating to try to take a simple shorthand description and put it to use, as sometimes its like putting together the bits and pieces of an ancient archive.

Lots of things to consider but there is reward. If the variety wasn't documented well(for whatever reasons) there will definitely be a big reward when one focuses on it, in the advent you do find the variety. One could look @ many examples, pinpoint the class of doubling in question and whether they decide to share that information, maybe document it with pictures themselves, either way you could bet they have a very scarce example.

Some listings are like treasure maps or spottings that we can use to point us in the right direction.I too am the "show me the money , show me now " type, but there is a thrill in looking for a variety that isn't well documented. A big plus is the variety is more wanted and may be more valued because many don't know about it or know how to pick it up, or use those maps to bring their concerned eye to those areas in question. Seek and you shall find.

[JamesWiles]

Let me begin by saying that I LOVE Ray's whole coin photos and can only dream of one day being able to do them myself. Ray, keep up the great work.

But, I must comment on the comments as well. As Bob and Chuck have previously stated, whole coin shots are nice, but basically useless for variety attribution. If you don't understand this, go to Heritage and pull up a major variety, such as the 18/17 buffalo and then tell me the markers, just based on the photo. It is very difficult to do. I know because I have done it. Then try to tell me the die state of the coin. Next to impossible! And that is on a Major variety, which doesn't need marker photos to correctly attribute. Dial that down a couple of notches to varieties with minor spreads and you can't even see the variety on the whole coin shot, let alone be able to attribute it. For what we do, whole coin shots don't get the job done. Would it be nice to see them, sure, but not for attribution purposes.

What frustrates me is collectors who continue to want everything for free and want it now, without consideration for the huge amount of work the attributers do. The criticism that CONECA doesn't have photos is never ending, when in fact CONECA has more photos published than any other attributer. A little research and a small purchase and you can have 10s of thousands of photos at your finger tips. I have published over 10 print books all with hundreds of photos each. I published hundreds of photos in CONECA Errorscope between 1995 and 2005 (You can still get the back issues.). Our new E-books have thousands of photos each, with the wheat cent doubled die containing over 10,000 alone. Not to mention the thousands of photos that are available on varietyvista.com. Furthermore I am diligently working to publish even more. All of our variety databases are works in progress which will take many more years to complete. We readily acknowledge that there are photographic holes and we are rapidly seeking to fill them, but to say that CONECA has zero images is just patently false.

I cover over a 100 years for each of 6 denominations. That is 6x coppercoins.com. That means 6x the space, 6x the work, 6x the expense. All so that the collector can have information to work with, in their collecting area. The CONECA Master Listing is not suppose to have photos. It is an interim work which provides everything besides photos. It is offered for free to the collector community and has been since 2000. It is a tremendous amount of information collected from the primary source material (coins). It is information that was painstakingly garnered from the review of thousands of variety coins. It tells you what we know about the varieties that we know exist. Where else can you find that information?

Furthermore to accurately attribute a class VI doubled die is one of the hardest attribution jobs we do. The doubling on a class VI is caused by the hub flattening from use. That scenario lends itself to several working dies with very similar looking extra thickness. Add some circulation wear which reduces the visibility of any markers and it can be impossible to accurately list, let alone attribute such varieties. Anyone would be frustrated attributing class VI doubled dies. Even I get that way at times. But I don't blame it on the best sets of variety files available. I blame it on the lack of high quality coins to work with. If your coin is high quality, then we need to see it, so that we can add its information to our databases. If not, then do your best with what you have and realize that it may never be able to be accurately attributed.

Which brings up another point that many collectors don't take into consideration. The modern standard of using high magnification to list die varieties means that lower grade coins will not be able to be accurately attributed because circulation will more quickly wear away the smaller variety spreads. Even with the old standard of 10x to list, it was sometimes difficult to attribute a well circulated variety. Many of the coins listed in the last 5 years will require AU/BU coins to accurately attribute. Less than that and the variety won't even be visible to attribute or will lack sufficient data to distinguish it from similar looking varieties.

Thanks,

[jallengomez]

But, I must comment on the comments as well. As Bob and Chuck have previously stated, whole coin shots are nice, but basically useless for variety attribution. If you don't understand this, go to Heritage and pull up a major variety, such as the 18/17 buffalo and then tell me the markers, just based on the photo. It is very difficult to do. I know because I have done it. Then try to tell me the die state of the coin. Next to impossible! And that is on a Major variety, which doesn't need marker photos to correctly attribute. Dial that down a couple of notches to varieties with minor spreads and you can't even see the variety on the whole coin shot, let alone be able to attribute it. For what we do, whole coin shots don't get the job done. Would it be nice to see them, sure, but not for attribution purposes.

Might be a monitor thing. I use a large, hi-res flat screen, and I can see the markers just fine. On a G4 example I can see die flow lines, and bump that up to an AU or MS specimen and the markers are no problem for me. Whole coin shots ARE NOT useless for attribution. They work for me just fine. Besides that, I was never calling for an either/or; of course close-ups of the variety would be useful.


What frustrates me is collectors who continue to want everything for free and want it now, without consideration for the huge amount of work the attributers do.

I just read back over this thread and couldn't find a single instance of anyone wanting anything for free. I own the e-books as I acknowledged earlier, and I'd be happy to pay a subscription service to a worthwhile database. As a matter of fact, I'd have no problems paying a subscription fee for Coppercoins.


We readily acknowledge that there are photographic holes and we are rapidly seeking to fill them, but to say that CONECA has zero images is just patently false.

I use the "Master Listing" section, and if you say the section is not intended to at least link to photos, then so be it.

I like hi-res full coin images. They work great for me and my setup. If others find no use for them, that's fine by me. I was just agreeing with Ray's idea because it seems to me that he also sees the value in having full coin images.