1940 penny high and left 4

[numidan 0]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

[Coinery 926]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

They're good on here, aren't they!

[Coinery 926]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

They're good on here, aren't they!

[Peckris 579]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

No, not at all. Observe the SHAPE of the 0 on your pair of coins, in relation to the shape of the 0 on the lower pair. Unlike the 1 and the 9, there is a difference - as I said, the 0 is smaller and squatter (more round and less oval), and slightly further from the teeth proportionately.

(This may be exaggerated by the fact that the coins in the top pair have some wear, where the bottom pair don't. But even so, there seems to be a difference. What would really help is if your system of blue and red lines was used on the bottom pair also).

Edited August 16, 2012 by Peckris

[numidan 0]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

No, not at all. Observe the SHAPE of the 0 on your pair of coins, in relation to the shape of the 0 on the lower pair. Unlike the 1 and the 9, there is a difference - as I said, the 0 is smaller and squatter (more round and less oval), and slightly further from the teeth proportionately.

(This may be exaggerated by the fact that the coins in the top pair have some wear, where the bottom pair don't. But even so, there seems to be a difference. What would really help is if your system of blue and red lines was used on the bottom pair also).

This is the best I could do with the picture Seuk presented. I reduced the width of top pair and increased its height. I added the red and blue lines as requested. I also added the white lines to compare the distances of the 0.

One thing that I did observe though, the denticles for the bottom pair seems longer and therefore the 0 seems to be closer on the bottom pair compaired to top pair. This may be attributed to the blury pictures used for the bottom pair and the merging process (which I could not have done better ).

[Peckris 579]

Thank you Seuk, that is exactly what I observed when I merged them and decided to post the images. For it to be perfect, the picture of the top pair is just a little larger than the picture of the bottom pair. That might be what is confusing Peckris

No, not at all. Observe the SHAPE of the 0 on your pair of coins, in relation to the shape of the 0 on the lower pair. Unlike the 1 and the 9, there is a difference - as I said, the 0 is smaller and squatter (more round and less oval), and slightly further from the teeth proportionately.

(This may be exaggerated by the fact that the coins in the top pair have some wear, where the bottom pair don't. But even so, there seems to be a difference. What would really help is if your system of blue and red lines was used on the bottom pair also).

This is the best I could do with the picture Seuk presented. I reduced the width of top pair and increased its height. I added the red and blue lines as requested. I also added the white lines to compare the distances of the 0.

One thing that I did observe though, the denticles for the bottom pair seems longer and therefore the 0 seems to be closer on the bottom pair compaired to top pair. This may be attributed to the blury pictures used for the bottom pair and the merging process (which I could not have done better ).

Yes, I think you may be right. Not just the difference in sharpness (your pictures may be scans rather than photos?), and in wear, but even more so in the way the light is falling on the teeth and numerals. Someone else here posted about a possible difference between two 1939 brass 3d's, and that turned out to be just the way the light falls. What is certain however, is that the 4 on your variety is definitely offset.

[numidan 0]

(your pictures may be scans rather than photos?)

In fact, I am using a digital microscope, that I built. It is based on the following telescope project. The optics comes from an old logitech handheld scanner (puchased at flea market) and the body from a microscope toy found in garage sale. It has its strengths and weaknesses but I love it. I can compare, in real time, about 30 to 40 coins in one hour.

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/lifecam/lifecam1.html

[declanwmagee 122]

Crikey. Some people are so flippin' clever. Did you see the binocular chair powered by a drill?

Fantastic.

[Accumulator 52]

(your pictures may be scans rather than photos?)

In fact, I am using a digital microscope, that I built. It is based on the following telescope project. The optics comes from an old logitech handheld scanner (puchased at flea market) and the body from a microscope toy found in garage sale. It has its strengths and weaknesses but I love it. I can compare, in real time, about 30 to 40 coins in one hour.

http://ghonis2.ho8.com/lifecam/lifecam1.html

Very impressive!

I often wonder how much more Freeman and his like would have discovered with a good scanner and high-powered image-comparison software. To be able to place, say, 20 1860 pennies on a scanner, in any random orientation, and immediately receive close-ups of all the differences (larger than a specific number of microns) would be an incredible tool.

[scott 129]

if he started on tiny date spreads we would have far to many 1860-63 bun varieties

[numidan 0]

I got the idea when I was reading that Griffin, a Canadian coin author, was using a projection system on a white board and with a grid system, was cataloging the different dies. I just modernized it

With the precision of die making today, I think you need to go this small to find different dies used.

Do not worry, I will not present everything I find interesting and flood this forum

[Accumulator 52]

I got the idea when I was reading that Griffin, a Canadian coin author, was using a projection system on a white board and with a grid system, was cataloging the different dies. I just modernized it

With the precision of die making today, I think you need to go this small to find different dies used.

Do not worry, I will not present everything I find interesting and flood this forum

If you had time, and a few high-grade examples to hand, it would be interesting to look at the range of busts which are classified as Reverse 6. Here's some of the differences I've picked up in the past, with the help of a others on this forum:

Different orientation of neckline rose

More curved/straight line to rear of neck

Berry in front/behind leaf of wreath

Additional detail to hair in from of bun

Double edge and extension to ear

Larger gap between B of BRITT and hair

Sharper nose

Slight double chin

These could be retouches to the die, of course.

The following examples are from 1863 (on the left) and 1861

[numidan 0]

If you had time, and a few high-grade examples to hand

That is one of my weakness. To get a lot of old high-grade coins, either you are very old and put them away a long long time ago, pass down from a grandfather, or you have a lot of money which none of these apply to me.

I will not be able to help you on this one, the earliest british penny I have is 1891 and most are AG to VG

[davidrj 194]

I often wonder how much more Freeman and his like would have discovered with a good scanner and high-powered image-comparison software. To be able to place, say, 20 1860 pennies on a scanner, in any random orientation, and immediately receive close-ups of all the differences (larger than a specific number of microns) would be an incredible tool.

I always try to use the same orientation when scanning my pennies - the light from my scanner is projected at an angle from the head.

Different illumination can lead you down blind alleys when variety spotting

[Peckris 579]

I got the idea when I was reading that Griffin, a Canadian coin author, was using a projection system on a white board and with a grid system, was cataloging the different dies. I just modernized it

With the precision of die making today, I think you need to go this small to find different dies used.

Do not worry, I will not present everything I find interesting and flood this forum

If you had time, and a few high-grade examples to hand, it would be interesting to look at the range of busts which are classified as Reverse 6. Here's some of the differences I've picked up in the past, with the help of a others on this forum:

Different orientation of neckline rose

More curved/straight line to rear of neck

Berry in front/behind leaf of wreath

Additional detail to hair in from of bun

Double edge and extension to ear

Larger gap between B of BRITT and hair

Sharper nose

Slight double chin

These could be retouches to the die, of course.

The following examples are from 1863 (on the left) and 1861

Presumably you mean Obverse 6 not Reverse 6? On those two examples, you missed one of the most obvious differences IMO - the obverse on the left has a bulging eye which the one on the right doesn't have. Also there's a difference in size and thickness of legend. Nevertheless, an impressive list of differences for what is supposed to be the same Obverse.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Peckris

[Coinery 926]

I got the idea when I was reading that Griffin, a Canadian coin author, was using a projection system on a white board and with a grid system, was cataloging the different dies. I just modernized it

With the precision of die making today, I think you need to go this small to find different dies used.

Do not worry, I will not present everything I find interesting and flood this forum

If you had time, and a few high-grade examples to hand, it would be interesting to look at the range of busts which are classified as Reverse 6. Here's some of the differences I've picked up in the past, with the help of a others on this forum:

Different orientation of neckline rose

More curved/straight line to rear of neck

Berry in front/behind leaf of wreath

Additional detail to hair in from of bun

Double edge and extension to ear

Larger gap between B of BRITT and hair

Sharper nose

Slight double chin

These could be retouches to the die, of course.

The following examples are from 1863 (on the left) and 1861

Presumably you mean Obverse 6 not Reverse 6? On those two examples, you missed one of the most obvious differences IMO - the obverse on the left has a bulging eye which the one on the right doesn't have. Also there's a difference in size and thickness of legend. Nevertheless, an impressive list of differences for what is supposed to be the same Obverse.

I can barely believe that's even meant to be the same obverse bust! Another one is bottom lip curled outwards! Have you tried transparency, making each image semi-transparent and then overlaying them? It may look too messy, not sure, worth a try though!

Edited August 17, 2012 by Coinery

[Varietalis 20]

Just reading this old thread and thought I'd like to put in my two penneth.. or indeed three penneth worth. There are, in my opinion, three varieties of the 1940 penny:

1) single exergue line which (as a general rule) has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

2) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

3) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to the left of but also crucially overlapping a tooth

[Varietalis 20]

Just reading this old thread and thought I'd like to put in my two penneth.. or indeed three penneth worth. There are, in my opinion, three varieties of the 1940 penny:

1) single exergue line which (as a general rule) has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

2) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

3) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to the left of but also crucially overlapping a tooth

[Varietalis 20]

P.S. the bottom serif of the 4 can play tricks on the eye, you have to look along the full length of the back of the 4 to see if it point to the gap.

[declanwmagee 122]

Any ideas on relative scarcity, Varietalis?

Quite a few of us here like a good microvariety...

[RLC35 288]

Just reading this old thread and thought I'd like to put in my two penneth.. or indeed three penneth worth. There are, in my opinion, three varieties of the 1940 penny:

1) single exergue line which (as a general rule) has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

2) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

3) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to the left of but also crucially overlapping a tooth

Does anyone have a good close up picture of a single exergue 1940 penny? I have a real hard time with ID'ing that one.

[Peter 615]

Bob

I hope tthis helps.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=1940+penny+single+exurge&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&biw=1366&bih=643&bvm=pv.xjs.s.en_US.jkEW54nYU50.O&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=nh8uUqeCN6jH7AbMkIDAAg#facrc=_&imgrc=3WxvdsaegQ70iM%3A%3BmEzO7eJPgcQ0KM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk%252Fpics%252Fg6%252F1d%252F1d40e.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk%252Fpenny.html%3B401%3B397

Just tap on the fIrst image.

Edited September 9, 2013 by Peter

[Peckris 579]

Just reading this old thread and thought I'd like to put in my two penneth.. or indeed three penneth worth. There are, in my opinion, three varieties of the 1940 penny:

1) single exergue line which (as a general rule) has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

2) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

3) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to the left of but also crucially overlapping a tooth

Forget the pointings - what I can see there is two distinctly aligned 4's: the first is rotated slightly counter clockwise, the second is rotated slightly clockwise, in relation to a hypothetical vertical line. That alone is enough to account for the pointing difference. Good spot.

[RLC35 288]

Bob

I hope tthis helps.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=1940+penny+single+exurge&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&biw=1366&bih=643&bvm=pv.xjs.s.en_US.jkEW54nYU50.O&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=nh8uUqeCN6jH7AbMkIDAAg#facrc=_&imgrc=3WxvdsaegQ70iM%3A%3BmEzO7eJPgcQ0KM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk%252Fpics%252Fg6%252F1d%252F1d40e.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk%252Fpenny.html%3B401%3B397

Just tap on the fIrst image.

Thanks Peter, that does help. I assume the top is the single, and the bottom is the double...correct. The top coin is more worn, and not as good a pic as the bottom coin though, or are all the single lines shown with wear like that? Thanks for the help

[Varietalis 20]

Just reading this old thread and thought I'd like to put in my two penneth.. or indeed three penneth worth. There are, in my opinion, three varieties of the 1940 penny:

1) single exergue line which (as a general rule) has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

2) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to a gap

3) double exergue line which has the 4 in the date pointing to the left of but also crucially overlapping a tooth

Forget the pointings - what I can see there is two distinctly aligned 4's: the first is rotated slightly counter clockwise, the second is rotated slightly clockwise, in relation to a hypothetical vertical line. That alone is enough to account for the pointing difference. Good spot.

In my haste I didn't make it clear that I'd attached four different thumbnails. The second posting looks like a duplicate of the first but the thumbnails were showing two additional coins.

In the first posting the two coins are: (a) double ex line 4 to left of (but overlapping) a tooth; (b double ex line with a wonky 4.

In the second posting the two coins are: © single ex line 4 to a gap (4 is not wonky i.e. a 'classic' 4 to a gap); (d) double ex line 4 to a gap.

As to scarcity, my gut feeling is that both pointings for the double ex line are equally common.

All credit to numidan, I agree that there is a real varietal difference.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Varietalis