| Author |
Message |
jstraw13Member
Posts: 96 Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Location: New Jersey
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:41 pm |
|
|
?1952S-1MM-002? All I can see is a second piece of a curve, almost like the 1950S-1MM-004 without the upper serif.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Bob PSite Admin
Posts: 3482 Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Location: Niceville, Florida
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:29 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
jstraw13Member
Posts: 96 Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Location: New Jersey
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:43 am |
|
|
|
Thanks Bob. What information are you basing the MM placement on? Is there a site or book that discusses this? I have seen MMs in the Lincoln Series all over the place... low, high, left and right. Since they were punched separately, I can understand that, but how was the location of MM placement determined?
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Bob PSite Admin
Posts: 3482 Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Location: Niceville, Florida
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:06 am |
|
|
Jon,
For those RPMs that we don't have on the site, I use 'The RPM book Second edition" What I mean by mintmark placement is where on the coin this particular variety is. If it's close to the 9 of the date, and your similar looking RPM is under the 5, then they can't be the same die. Remember that all of a given RPM will be in the same location since one particular die struck them all. You can not have the same RPM in different locations under the date. That's all there is to it really.
_________________ Bob Piazza
Site Admin/Moderator
Attributer/Photographer
bobp@coppercoins.com
mustbebob1@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
 |
jstraw13Member
Posts: 96 Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Location: New Jersey
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:24 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|