1990 NO mint mark 1 1

[Fitzon00]

Hey I’m pretty new at all of this and was doing research but I think we all know how YouTube and eBay can take you down a rabbit hole that always seems to lead to 2 Guys digging a pool. So my thing is I have a 1990 no mint mark penny with clear doubling on reverse with word “AMERICA” maybe some more doubling else places too. I was doing research and I can not really tell if it’s a proof that has been tossed around a lot of pockets or just a reg 1990 no mint. I’m really curious on how rare my 1990 penny is and the current value. I’m gonna see if I can’t find more about it while I get some answers for you guys thank you all much appreciated. 

[Fitzon00]

[Fitzon00]

[Fitzon00]

If I’m not mistaken this is what a Philadelphia penny would look like but like I said I’m new 🫣

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 12/13/2023 at 5:21 AM, Fitzon00 said:

Hey I’m pretty new at all of this and was doing research but I think we all know how YouTube and eBay can take you down a rabbit hole that always seems to lead to 2 Guys digging a pool. So my thing is I have a 1990 no mint mark penny with clear doubling on reverse with word “AMERICA” maybe some more doubling else places too. I was doing research and I can not really tell if it’s a proof that has been tossed around a lot of pockets or just a reg 1990 no mint. I’m really curious on how rare my 1990 penny is and the current value. I’m gonna see if I can’t find more about it while I get some answers for you guys thank you all much appreciated. 

It's a normal cent struck for circulation at the Philadelphia Mint, not a proof, any doubling is either mechanical or too minor to be of interest, value one cent. 

[Greenstang]

Your correct, no MM means it was minted in Philadelphia.   
What you have is not a DD, it is called Die Deterioration Doubling (DDD)
which is caused by the wear on the striking die. This is common and adds
no value to the coin. Keep as an example or spend it.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Greenstang
Correct typo

[EagleRJO]

On 12/13/2023 at 5:21 AM, Fitzon00 said:

Hey I’m pretty new at all of this and was doing research but I think we all know how YouTube and eBay can take you down a rabbit hole that always seems to lead to 2 Guys digging a pool.

With those research sources I think all that is missing is a diving board for the pool. 

For help in identifying hub doubling see the attached, and for researching doubling see Wexler's website ... https://doubleddie.com/1801.html

On 12/13/2023 at 5:32 AM, Fitzon00 said:

a 1990 no mint mark penny ... If I’m not mistaken this is what a Philadelphia penny would look like but like I said I’m new 🫣

For a cent from Philly that normally doesn't have a mintmark it's not necessary to say "no mint mark", and could actually be misleading that one should be there but is missing.  It's usually just written "1990 Cent", or to be more precise "1990 (P) Cent".  For additional information about the coin including examples of various colors and grades see the following CoinFacts page ... https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1990-1c-rb/3082

On 12/13/2023 at 5:21 AM, Fitzon00 said:

So my thing is I have a 1990 no mint mark penny with clear doubling on reverse with word “AMERICA” maybe some more doubling else places too.

I agree with others that the coin has "worthless" doubling since it appears to be lower than the design element without any notching.  See the following webpage for a more complete description of that ,,, https://doubleddie.com/144801.html (Wexler's "Worthless Doubling)

[Fitzon00]

On 12/13/2023 at 7:48 AM, EagleRJO said:

With those research sources I think all that is missing is a diving board for the pool. 

For help in identifying hub doubling see the attached, and for researching doubling see Wexler's website ... https://doubleddie.com/1801.html

For a cent from Philly that normally doesn't have a mintmark it's not necessary to say "no mint mark", and could actually be misleading that one should be there but is missing.  It's usually just written "1990 Cent", or to be more precise "1990 (P) Cent".  For additional information about the coin including examples of various colors and grades see the following CoinFacts page ... https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1990-1c-rb/3082

I agree with others that the coin has "worthless" doubling since it appears to be lower than the design element without any notching.  See the following webpage for a more complete description of that ,,, https://doubleddie.com/144801.html (Wexler's "Worthless Doubling)

If one were missing I’d say it was once there or usually there. I put no mint mark cause there isn’t one. As I wrote a whole question out to read and then get a response from others. Like I said I’m still a newbie tho I’ll take the helpful hint. 
so we are all to the conclusion this is die deterioration and not die doubling?

Edited December 13, 2023 by Fitzon00

[Coinbuf]

On 12/13/2023 at 9:09 AM, Fitzon00 said:

so we are all to the conclusion this is dye deterioration and not due doubling?

I have no idea what you are seeing in the photo of the rev steps or if that is even relevant to your question.   We know many things but nobody here is a mind reader so you need to be clear and describe what you are asking about.   I see nothing in your photo but a normal cent with some die deterioration and/or strike doubling.   In the past some people have been confused and think that the columns show doubling, that is just part of the design which includes the columns inside the memorial behind the front columns.   But again I'm just guessing as you were not specific in your question.

[Fitzon00]

On 12/13/2023 at 10:23 AM, Coinbuf said:

I have no idea what you are seeing in the photo of the rev steps or if that is even relevant to your question.   We know many things but nobody here is a mind reader so you need to be clear and describe what you are asking about.   I see nothing in your photo but a normal cent with some die deterioration and/or strike doubling.   In the past some people have been confused and think that the columns show doubling, that is just part of the design which includes the columns inside the memorial behind the front columns.   But again I'm just guessing as you were not specific in your question.

My question was right under the picture I’m not sure if I can spell my question any better. 

[Coinbuf]

On 12/13/2023 at 9:47 AM, Fitzon00 said:

My question was right under the picture I’m not sure if I can spell my question any better. 

Yes I quoted your question, the term "this" is ambiguous, what does "this" refer to?   The entire coin, just the steps that is in your photo, your question is anything but clear.   Proper communication is necessary for any discussion to take place, ubiquitous terms like this or that may work fine in a face to face discussion where you can be pointing out what you see, that does not work for internet conversation.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Coinbuf

[Sandon]

On 12/13/2023 at 5:21 AM, Fitzon00 said:

I can not really tell if it’s a proof that has been tossed around a lot of pockets or just a reg 1990 no mint.

   A proof coin of the sort to which you are referring has a mirrorlike surface in the fields, and virtually all U.S. proof coins made from about 1975 on also have frosted devices and lettering that creates a "cameo" contrast, as on this 2000-S proof cent:

   The 1990 cent that you found in circulation is nearly uncirculated, with most of its original color, but has no trace of a mirror surface or frosted devices. It can't possibly have been struck as a proof.

   Moreover, the estimated 3,555 proof cents that the mint erroneously struck in 1990 without the "S" mintmark would have been included in 1990 proof sets (regular and Prestige) that were issued in hard plastic cases and sold to collectors. (One source--the 7th edition Expanded Deluxe Edition or "Mega Red" Redbook at p. 290, note x, indicates that no more than 250 of these sets actually left the mint.) To my knowledge, they have only been found in such sets, not among circulating coins. These estimated 3,555 coins were out of a total proof production of 3,299,599 proof cents dated 1990, so even if all of them had left the mint only one out of about a thousand 1990 proof sets could have contained a "no S" cent. Although low value proof coins that were removed from proof sets are occasionally spent and found in circulation, what are the odds that someone would have spent a 1990 "no S" proof cent worth several thousand dollars and that you would be the person lucky enough to find it?

  I see no trace of doubling--die doubling or otherwise--on your coin. I'll discuss this issue more thoroughly as a separate post.

[Sandon]

On 12/13/2023 at 5:21 AM, Fitzon00 said:

So my thing is I have a 1990 no mint mark penny with clear doubling on reverse with word “AMERICA” maybe some more doubling else places too.

   Here are, courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries, photos of my 1983 doubled die reverse cent, authenticated and graded MS 65 RB by PCGS, the variety listed in the "Redbook":

    Note the crisp, clear doubling on the reverse lettering and at the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial. In this case the doubling is in a downward direction because the "hub" used to create the reverse coinage die from which these coins were struck was shifted downward between blows. Die doubling can be in different directions, involve only portions of the affected die, or have a greater or (usually) smaller "spread", but it will always be crisp and clear, and if significant with both images at about the same level. Most of the "doubling" seen on coins is shelf-like strike doubling (a.k.a. machine or mechanical doubling) or "ghostly" secondary images resulting from die deterioration. The former type is dealt with and shown in detail in Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). Coins with these other types of doubling have little or no collector value.

   I took a closer (blown up) look at your photos of the 1990 cent after writing my previous post and still don't see any evidence of die doubling in the lettering, only some ghostly images that are probably lighting reflections but could be from die deterioration. The coin also has plating blisters, which are extremely common on earlier copper plated zinc cents. (The 1983 DDR I posted has lots of them.)  If the highly magnified photo of the area between the columns you subsequently posted is from this coin, the extra image between the columns might be indicative of a minor doubled die of the type listed on doubleddie.com or varietyvista.com, which you can check for comparisons. Be advised that such minor doubled dies have a limited market and usually aren't attributed by the top tier grading services.

   Respectfully, your difficulties seem to me to stem from (1) your apparent belief that you can find rare and valuable coins in circulation, which in real life almost never happens and (2) your desire to pursue advanced areas of numismatics such as rare die varieties without understanding basic concepts such as the obvious differences between circulation strike and proof coins and the basics of how coins are made. On one of your previous topics, I referred you to some print and online resources from which you can learn about such things. I also recommend that you attend coin shows or coin club meetings where you can see what some of the coins you are referring to actually look like and learn from experienced collectors and dealers about them, as well have them examine your coins in person. We can be more helpful if you have some knowledge.

[powermad5000]

One thing to remember from coins that are struck from true hub doubled dies have more than just one element or one set of lettering showing a clear crisp secondary image at the same height as the images of the rest of the coin in a normal strike. One clue that you are seeing one of the forms of mechanical doubling, strike doubling, or die deterioration doubling is when you see the effect in only one or a few letters or only one word of a whole motto. When you see this just in AMERICA, and not across the entire UNITED STATES oF AMERICA, as well as looking for it in other design elements such as the columns, steps, or the entire memorial, you can most likely be sure you are looking at some sort of mechanical doubling.

I do have a question regarding your closeup photo. Is that the same 1990 (P) cent at the top of the thread in regards to the reverse, or is the closeup of the stairs and columns of the memorial on a completely different cent? The color seems different to me and could just be the lighting, but I wanted to ask to make sure. If that is a completely different cent, you would need to start a new thread with that and post clear cropped images of both sides of that coin, because there could be markers for that coin that are present which we would need to see. 

[Fitzon00]

@powermad5000 thank you so much for realizing it’s not the same coin and proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much. Much respect and thank you for your insight with out being contradicting with what you say. Most people just want to be right and make others share their opinions. It’s not the same pic. https://www.lincolncentresource.com/doubledies/1994ddo1.html 

it’s from a 1994 DDR that apparently doesn’t exist or “people mistakenly think” was the quote I think. But again thank you for your info and I’ll be sure to keep hunting. 

[VKurtB]

On 12/13/2023 at 2:36 PM, Fitzon00 said:

proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much

This group DOES CONTAIN many of THE MOST KNOWLEDGABLE numismatists in the entire country, if not the world. When you demean the knowledge you encounter here, all you do is embarrass yourself. 

[Newenglandrarities]

On 12/13/2023 at 12:36 PM, Fitzon00 said:

@powermad5000 thank you so much for realizing it’s not the same coin and proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much. Much respect and thank you for your insight with out being contradicting with what you say. Most people just want to be right and make others share their opinions. It’s not the same pic. https://www.lincolncentresource.com/doubledies/1994ddo1.html 

it’s from a 1994 DDR that apparently doesn’t exist or “people mistakenly think” was the quote I think. But again thank you for your info and I’ll be sure to keep hunting. 

So, was the effort here to make it seem like people here don’t know anything or did I just misread your post?  Multiple times a month someone comes on a coin forum and tries to catch the people with a mismatched photo or something completely different.  I find it always interesting when that happens.  Why would someone come on to ask a question only to waste not only their own time, but time of people here who are actively trying to help people.  
 

Now I’m not saying that was your approach, but in general that kind of “defensive” move is often associated with a poster who got bad news and now wants to blame the forum members for that bad news.  
 

If I misunderstood your above post, I apologize, but when I see “for realizing it’s not the same coin and proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much” that is generally not really a great statement.  There are world renowned experts here who are helping everyone.  I think that’s a pretty big red flag.  

[Newenglandrarities]

And I’ll add that many of the sources you are using to look at this stuff was written and published by people, often who are members here responding, as well as on all the other major coin forums.  
 

I promise you this, you will get the EXACT same response from every reputable coin forum online, maybe the only place you won’t is in YouTube comments.  Just food for thought.  

[Sandon]

On 12/13/2023 at 2:24 PM, Sandon said:

If the highly magnified photo of the area between the columns you subsequently posted is from this coin, the extra image between the columns might be indicative of a minor doubled die of the type listed on doubleddie.com or varietyvista.com, which you can check for comparisons.

   As I indicated, I also wondered whether this subsequent photo was from the same coin, as the photo quality was much better and as I couldn't see the extra image in the previous photos. I also identified that image as a possible indicator of a minor doubled die.

On 12/13/2023 at 3:36 PM, Fitzon00 said:

proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much. Much respect and thank you for your insight with out being contradicting with what you say. Most people just want to be right and make others share their opinions.

    I happen to have collected coins and studied numismatic literature for over 52 years now. I don't know everything about coins. No one does. (There's also a limit to what anyone can determine from blurry, over-exposed photos such as those you have been posting.)  As a self-confessed "newbie", don't you think that it is more likely that we are right than you are? Wouldn't it be to your benefit to listen to us than trying to deceive us by posting photos of coins other than the ones you are asking us about?

[Coinbuf]

Just another worthless troll @Fitzon00

[EagleRJO]

On 12/13/2023 at 11:09 AM, Fitzon00 said:

If one [mintmark] were missing I’d say it was once there or usually there. I put no mint mark cause there isn’t one ... Like I said I’m still a newbie tho I’ll take the helpful hint.

I was just trying to provide standard nomenclature in numismatics relative to coins which either normally don't have a mintmark or where one might be missing.  That was a "helpful hint" which you seem to want to just ignore.

On 12/13/2023 at 3:36 PM, Fitzon00 said:

so we are all to the conclusion this is die deterioration and not die doubling?

... [and then] it’s not the same coin and proving my point of how people in this group think they know so much. Much respect and thank you for your insight with out being contradicting with what you say. Most people just want to be right and make others share their opinions. It’s not the same pic. https://www.lincolncentresource.com/doubledies/1994ddo1.html 

it’s from a 1994 DDR that apparently doesn’t exist or “people mistakenly think” was the quote I think. But again thank you for your info and I’ll be sure to keep hunting. 

It's not really clear what you were trying to prove by posting a photo showing part of a different coin with true doubling, misrepresenting that it was on your coin when members had already identified deterioration of dies for your coin, and then underhandedly asking members to verify it was die deterioration on your coin when you knew it wasn't.

At that point most people had already formed opinions on the worthless doubling observed on your coin from the previous photos, and then indicated either your questions were not clear or that the additional photo appeared to be from a different coin and/or indicated that photo did show some minor true die doubling.  That was a duplicitous way to try and validate the false belief your coin had true doubling, when it does not.  And they actually gave you the correct evaluation or advice.

You will likely not get much help here being underhanded and duplicitous in an attempt to prove a misguided point, which in your case failed miserably and will likely end with you just being added to "ignore" lists.  You will be added to mine.

Edited December 14, 2023 by EagleRJO