Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Superior example of "ejection impac...

Expand Messages
  • mdia1@aol.com
    It s simply a pit. It looks like a strike-through error to me. An unambiguous diagnosis of ejection impact doubling depends on the transfer of identifiable
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      It's simply a pit.  It looks like a strike-through error to me.  An unambiguous diagnosis of ejection impact doubling depends on the transfer of identifiable design elements.
       
      In a message dated 12/1/05 4:49:20 A.M. Central Standard Time, darkdesert@... writes:
      I wonder what ejection impact doubling might look like on a silver
      eagle?  Perhaps this planchet error is one: http://tinyurl.com/9v7br
       
    • Aaron
      this silver eagle does look like a pit, the real mystery is why it is $200. anyways, because identifiable design transfer is rare, like in the case of the
      Message 2 of 3 , Dec 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        this silver eagle does look like a pit, the real mystery is why it
        is $200.

        anyways, because identifiable design transfer is rare, like in the
        case of the eyes, I think you said 1 in 10 samples that you saw, how
        do you identify it when you can't readily identify what part has
        been transferred, that's kind of why I posted this silver eagle. I
        guess there would be a lack of shelving. And if you are not sure
        what part has been transferred, then you can't really use die polish
        marks. It just seems like in most cases, it would be difficult to
        tell. Luckily, Mike, found some really good examples from the
        350,000 he went through. The transfer of the eyes is obvious (picts
        from the article), so there is no denying that you are looking at
        parts of the eye that have been transferred. Then you confirmed it
        by matching up die polish marks (or overpolish marks).

        what are the areas on a silver eagle that would most likely transfer
        over from ejection impact doubling.

        I think it would be hard to find on a silver eagle because of the
        design, whereas the eyes in the Sac design are rather noticeable
        when it does transfer.

        I guess I'm asking what one needs to look for on the obverse of a
        silver eagle.




        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, mdia1@a...
        wrote:
        >
        >
        > It's simply a pit. It looks like a strike-through error to me.
        An
        > unambiguous diagnosis of ejection impact doubling depends on the
        transfer of
        > identifiable design elements.
        >
        > In a message dated 12/1/05 4:49:20 A.M. Central Standard Time,
        > darkdesert@h... writes:
        >
        > I wonder what ejection impact doubling might look like on a
        silver
        > eagle? Perhaps this planchet error is one:
        http://tinyurl.com/9v7br
        >
      • Mike Diamond
        ... has ... You can t unless you have a consistent pattern of damage that is detectable in a series of coins. That pattern, in turn, must show up on other
        Message 3 of 3 , Dec 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Aaron"
          <darkdesert@h...> wrote:

          > how
          > do you identify it (EID) when you can't readily identify what part
          has
          > been transferred, that's kind of why I posted this silver eagle.

          You can't unless you have a consistent pattern of "damage" that is
          detectable in a series of coins. That pattern, in turn, must show up
          on other coins in which transfer of identifiable design elements is
          seen.

          > I
          > guess there would be a lack of shelving.

          Yes, EID always lacks shelving.

          > And if you are not sure
          > what part has been transferred, then you can't really use die
          polish
          > marks.

          Correct.

          > It just seems like in most cases, it would be difficult to
          > tell. Luckily, Mike found some really good examples from the
          > 350,000 he went through. The transfer of the eyes is obvious
          (picts
          > from the article), so there is no denying that you are looking at
          > parts of the eye that have been transferred. Then you confirmed it
          > by matching up die polish marks (or overpolish marks).
          >
          > what are the areas on a silver eagle that would most likely
          transfer
          > over from ejection impact doubling?

          These would by low-lying areas of the design as these correspond to
          shallow areas of the die face. The latter would be closest to the
          coin should the coin be thrust back into the die face. But I can't
          point to any specific areas on a Silver Eagle that would be most
          prone to EID.

          > I think it would be hard to find on a silver eagle because of the
          > design, whereas the eyes in the Sac design are rather noticeable
          > when it does transfer.
          >
          > I guess I'm asking what one needs to look for on the obverse of a
          > silver eagle.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.