Is there a standardized MM placement determination procedure?

[KLFenstermaker]

Hi, all.

Is there a standardized procedure in LCs for determining MM placement? I have only found one post on it in the Lincolns For Beginners forum, but details were thin and could lead, I think, to different people getting different results. It talked about the one vertical line along the spine, showed two lines, one on each side of the MM. The horizontal line seems like it could be placed anywhere, or is it just at right angles to the 1st line at the top of the MM?. It seems to me that a couple more reference points are needed, like maybe a line from the bottom of the leading one to the top of the MM. Thanks for any help you can give in this.

[mustbebob]

Mint marks prior to 1990 could be placed anywhere under the date. That is why you see so many variations. They were punched by hand and that is also why we see the abundance of repunched mint marks. From 1990 to present, they are added to the master hub. If there is a specific placement for them now, I am unaware of where those specs are.

[KLFenstermaker]

SingleShot0004.jpgSingleShot0000.jpgNot talking about that, talking about how you determine the difference in mint mark location between varieties. The method I use forms a triangle, and the size and shape of that triangle, as well as where the left vertical line intersects the 9, should always be different when comparing different placements. That's my method, but is there a standard?

[TPring]

Your best option is to learn to do overlays -- Try PicMonkey.

[Petespockets55]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]138408[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]138407[/ATTACH]Not talking about that, talking about how you determine the difference in mint mark location between varieties. The method I use forms a triangle, and the size and shape of that triangle, as well as where the left vertical line intersects the 9, should always be different when comparing different placements. That's my method, but is there a standard?

There is no standardized reference for mint mark placement using your triangulation that I know of. Just images available for individuals to compare.
Your method is more methodical than mine but it seems using an overlay from images is the most precise way.

I usually hold a piece of paper up to the screen along the edge of the vertical bar on Denver and the edge of the curve and serif on San Fran. Then I see where the edge of the paper lines up on the second or third numeral.

I think we all do something similar for a fairly quick visual confirmation.
And when we get stumped we beg and cajole Jim to help with overlays.

[KLFenstermaker]

Just started working with overlays, my problem right now is getting the sizing correct. It seems like I get it partly right, i.e., the 9 seems to overlay properly, but spacing between the other objects are not right. I guess I just need to focus on the 9. But thanks for the advice. Will need to look at PicMonkey

[TPring]

Just started working with overlays, my problem right now is getting the sizing correct. It seems like I get it partly right, i.e., the 9 seems to overlay properly, but spacing between the other objects are not right. I guess I just need to focus on the 9. But thanks for the advice. Will need to look at PicMonkey

Just remember that the spacing of the date stays the same on all the coins because that is from the master die -- The MMs were done afterward.


PicMonkey not only allows you to adjust the size, it also allows you to adjust the tilt and the transparency and allows you to rapidly 'flash' back and forth between the two pics.

[GrumpyEd]

I usually hold a piece of paper up to the screen along the edge of the vertical bar on Denver and the edge of the curve and serif on San Fran. Then I see where the edge of the paper lines up on the second or third numeral.

That is how I do most of it.
Overlay if you need perfection but I mostly get away with a paper to look at images. It works best E-W since you can judge relative to the digits of the date, N-S is sort of a judgement call on how close to the date but you have less to go by.

[GrumpyEd]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]138408[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]138407[/ATTACH]Not talking about that, talking about how you determine the difference in mint mark location between varieties. The method I use forms a triangle, and the size and shape of that triangle, as well as where the left vertical line intersects the 9, should always be different when comparing different placements. That's my method, but is there a standard?

On some like your example, it's easy to rule things out, the second one the D spine lines up with the trailing edge of 9, the first pic the D is partly under the 9 and slightly lower so you can rule it out that they match with nothing else. You only need a paper or overlay if it's a closer match.

[WaterSport]

I think what we are all hearing is that if there was a "best way" to determine a mint mark location when trying to ID a variety, we would all be doing it. The simple act of determining a correct mint mark position took me a long time to figure out. And to this day, it works best on a few cents I have studied the most frequently. Try not to spend more time playing with a mint mark rather than learn all you can about the other markers. Another fact of life - when searching circulated specimans -you will just have to give up now and then because those markers are worn and that hit, smashed, smeared mint mark, is not going to help you one bit. And thats just the way it is.

WS

[Petespockets55]

I think what we are all hearing is that if there was a "best way" to determine a mint mark location when trying to ID a variety, we would all be doing it. The simple act of determining a correct mint mark position took me a long time to figure out. And to this day, it works best on a few cents I have studied the most frequently. Try not to spend more time playing with a mint mark rather than learn all you can about the other markers. Another fact of life - when searching circulated specimans -you will just have to give up now and then because those markers are worn and that hit, smashed, smeared mint mark, is not going to help you one bit. And thats just the way it is.

WS

WS, Very well said.
We novice collectors have a big advantage with the information available online. The guys and gals that have been collecting 20, 30, 50 years have seen some extraordinary changes that make it much easier for us newbies.

Thanks to all you collecting Obi-Wan-Kenobi's out there, sharing your knowledge.
Grateful we are!!

[jfines69]

You have a good start on location but I think you are concentrating on just one point to much - 9... The MM location has numerous point within its field for alignment... The 3 I start with are the MMs location compared to the date, jacket and rim (jacket and rim are not always available for comparison on CC, VV and Wexlers)... Also I take into consideration circ wear (PSD) and die wear... Your 52D I just did and overlay for http://www.lincolncentforum.com/foru...1MM-006-or-008 has a lot of damage to the date and MM which change the points of alignment... On that overlay I had to use more than the 3 starting alignment areas... There is more to verify a RPM, for me, before I get to the MM location... I can explain that also if you wish???

[GrumpyEd]

There is more to verify a RPM, for me, before I get to the MM location.

A golden rule applies for doubled dies and RPMs. Always start with the doubling, then look at mintmark location if it has a mintmark, then go for markers. Breaking that order leads to confusion, you can find a matching location but not an RPM or doubled die or a similar marker. Doubling-location-markers