Came Across This One This Morning

[BankRolls]

2005-P

[Bob P]

If you ONLY looked at 2005P coins, you would find lots of column bars like this one. It is too minor for the site, but definitely one of the many for the date.

[murphy]

You think 2005 has a lot of Bar Cents? You should search only the 2006P's. For a while, I quit turning them over to see if there was a bar or wavystep. I still turn them over but I'm particular in what I'm looking for... a bar & "anti-wavysteps" on the same 2006P cent.

[Dick]

Murph,
" a bar & "anti-wavysteps" on the same 2006P cent." ????
The 2007-P have wavy steps, but I never heard of "anti-wavysteps". Care to elaborate?
Dick

[BankRolls]

Thanks Bob
I think I'll just shy away from the newer cents.
I do have a couple to send to Chuck,
but I think I'll let that be that.
I'd rather search for, something worth searching for.LOL

[aballein]

so why is it too minor for the site..it seems pretty visible to me, very distinct, im just trying to wrap my head around the criteria for "new" finds. Is the the length that keeps it out or is it the fact that soo many have been found its just not important enough?

[wavysteps2003]

Hi Aaron - Every doubled die is important and your find is included in that statement.

What we must remember though is the shear number of doubled dies that the single squeeze process is putting out. Wavy step and trail die files are approaching the 500 entry mark. Bill Slaughter's last count on extra columns was over the 600 listings mark. That is 1100 possible canidates for this site. Even if Bob and Chuck could spend 24/7 doing entries into the site, they would not get caught up with that amount of files. So, a criteria was set for extra columns to meet before they could be included into the site. In your case, that one did not meet the criteria set, but it does not take away from the importance of the find.

Just a bit of insight, CONECA does not even list the extra columns (exception; the two 1994 Lincoln cent DDR-001 & DDR-002). John Wexler (NCADD) lists about everyone that can be seen. Bill Slaughter, our guru of the extra columns, lists just about everone that comes his way. So you can see, each entity has its own way and reason for listing varities.

BJ Neff

[hasfam]

Has Bill Slaughters set up a number system to ID the bar columns? Does anyone know if he plans on publishing his finds/number system in the future for the collecting community? It would be great to have a way to name/number all of these that we decide to keep. Just wondering.
Thanks,
Rock

[wavysteps2003]

I know that Bill did an article in ERRORSCOPE on this subject and maybe we cfan persuade him to do a post on these anomalies in the forum.

BJ Neff

[Dick]

BJ, Rock, and others, does NCADD have a "photo" data bank, such as ours at coppercoins, or is it like CONECA, where everything is listed on a "3X5 card"? I see references to FS, Wexlers, etc, but Other than the CPG. I havent seen anything but photos in books, etc but few, if any give any markers for reference. Ore we Unique, in this respect? If so I wonder what BOB, and CHUCK are going to do when the Flood arrives? The reason I ask is that I have so many coins that have RPM's, and other anomilies, that can't be completely identified, that just go into rolls, for the day when I, or someone else will be able to go to the photo ID bank, and identify them! What if we could find a way to "fill in" the missing photos, the ones that say, "sorry, no photo available at this time".
Something like a "photo pool" segment, where the members could post photos, with the markers, and pertinant data, so as to be able to identify, at least partially, the coin in hand. THEN, we could send the coin to Bob, or Chuck as they desire, to be attributed, and given a CC number. That way we would have an alternate source, that we could use, and still have the info available to all MEMBERS, but not available to "visitors".

Chuck, Is something like this feasable, and if so, how much trouble would it be, to become a reality? I understand that there would be photos like mine, that would give limited info, but, at the same time given the markers that would also be included with the photo, should make it possible to partially ID just about any coin, (Die).
Dick

[Bob P]

Although this has been said before, there are numerous new members, so it bears repeating. I don't mind the questions concerning what we consider too minor to put on the site. It once again gives us an opportunity to explain things again.
As BJ stated, there are approximately 400 wavy steps, and 600 column bar cents out there. You combine that with what Chuck and I believe are about 1500 more varieties from before the single squeeze era, and you can see what a daunting task it would be to list them....and this is just on Lincoln Cents!
The varieties you find are important because you took the time to search for them, and they are now a part of your collection. You found an anomaly that really wasn't supposed to be there. However, when it comes to minor RPMs, bars, lines, doubling etc., there has got to be a point when we are spinning our wheels if we list them. It is hard enough trying to attribute some of the larger bars now. Imagine if I had to search through 100 or so 2005 column bars to try and identify a tiny bar like the one pictured. Chuck already posted what it takes to attribute one coin...sometimes up to an hour or so. It is impractical to spend $3.00 each to send me a coin like this one. Other points to ponder is what is the attribution going to do for that coin. If I put a price on the site for 25 cents for that coin, is it worth it? Is anyone going to buy it? Does that tiny column bar change the value of your collection?
Sometimes, a coin having a proper attribution can be advantageous because it says it has been attributed by someone who knows about these things. Other times, it is just wasting your money.
We are making inroads as far as coppercoins becoming a nationally recognized attribution system. I personally feel that by attributing some of these tiny varieties, that it wastes your money, and somewhat weakens our reputation. We want the world to know about nice, solid and identifiable varieties that folks are willing to search for and hopefully find. These minor varieties are still no less important, but we can not get ourselves into this at this point in time. Remember that I still have a full time job as well as other things that must be done to run a household. Chuck has many other things he has to do to earn a living.
Should Bill Slaughter wish to start numbering all the column bar varieties he has, then that certainly is his prerogative, and he can do so with my support. However, it would be like BJ's Wavy Steps and Trails dies. His own numbering system is how he can identify them. We put only the strongest of them on the site, and the same can be said with the column bars.
It can be hard to get your numbering system out there into the world and be recognized by collectors. Most people collect certain types of varieties because that's what they like to do. I collect them all, but even as an attributer for coppercoins.com, I have literally hundreds and hundreds of varieties in my collection that will never have a coppercoins, or any other number assigned to them, and I'm all right with that.

[hasfam]

Hear. Hear. Well said. I have believed the same about attribution for years. Why spend $3 on a $1 coin. That's what makes this site so sweet. If it's listed here and I can attribute it then I think I've got something reasonably decent. But if not, then I'm alright not having numbers on my coins. A brief description works well too. And, after a year or so I pick up a coin I once thought had enough merit to save and look at it again and I can't for the life of me see why I saved it........I spend it. Must not have been that good.
Rock

[Russellhome]

I understand that every attributor has some sort of cut-off for things that they consider too minor to list. And I also don't have a problem with Coppercoins setting a higher standard for what is considered listable - than other attributors such as Wexler. I have sent stuff to Crawford and Wexler that they returned as too minor to list - so they have standards, too. For the most part, they both will attribute varieties that are more minor than what Coppercoins will list. And I'm glad they do because I do like official 'file IDs' on even my more minor varieties. But on a site like this, I'm kind of glad that I don't have to search through 36 pages of minor DDs to see what the more significant finds are for a particular year. So - I guess what I'm saying is that I appricate the diversity in the standards and I don't think any more or less of anyone for the standards they set.

If you have 10 or more of a particular variety, it is worth spending $3 to have a $1 coin attributed. I do keep the minor varieties - like the bar shown in the original post. If I find a batch of them, I will try and get them attributed. But to try and sell any of the extras I find of a minor variety - it is just not worth the effort. I tend to include them as a 'free bonus' with the sale of a more significant variety. Everyone likes free stuff.

[coppercoins]

I'll try to weigh in a bit here...

There are three major issues with listing the most minor of die varieties on this site. They are:

1. Space. There is only so much web space I can take up with images before I run out of room on the drive and have to go to a far more expensive option. My server is a 2GB server, and this site takes up about 980MB. I have other sites sharing the room with me on this server, so coppercoins is over half its size limit on the server it's on...and we still have a LOT of easily noticeable die varieties to find and list. Taking up the space with the very minor stuff will choke the space I have and keep us from listing the better stuff - without going to a far more expensive option...and I'm just not in the mood for a monthly server bill of over $250.

2. Attribution time. Already it can take hours upon hours to figure out whether coins match up to dies already listed. If I listed every one of the some 1,000 different VERY minor die varieties that are out there from 1995 to date, attributing for us and the collectors would be living hell. Fine that a coin is worth a buck and it costs three to get it looked at, but consider for a moment that I develop websites, photograph coins, and am an educator and artist...not just an attributor. What I do generally costs people more than $75 per hour. With a single coin taking 45 minutes or more to attribute, then to photograph it if it's not there, I'm making far less than minimum wage attributing coins. If I did that full time, there would be a LOT of listings on the site, but I would be homeless. It simply takes too much time to list every 30X microscopic line and bump.

3. Marketability. While this site does seek to be the most comprehensive published listing of Lincoln cent die varieties, there's a caveat attached to that which states they need to be die varieties that more than a dozen people would care about. While profit is not the sole intent of die variety hunters, it is a large part of why we search through thousands of coins to find something interesting...we eventually want to sell them - or at least some of them. If this site is chocked full of these flyspeck bars, wavy steps, and split serifs, the people who try to use the site to identify the better stuff will become frustrated picking through page after page of seemingly worthless blather trying to find the worthwhile meat. This site has to have a marketable pull from a large group of people - it's not out here to be the perfect site for a dozen people.

I can tell you this much...I have been working 12 hours a day for the past four weeks preparing myself for the summer - I'll be off for a little while, then in Colorado teaching at the seminar, then off to the big ANA show in August. I will fall behind in my work if I don't have myself prepared well ahead of time. One of the things on my slate to finish BEFORE the summer comes around is the next version of coppercoins.com, which WILL have a membership fee associated with viewing the attribution information. I HAVE to start charging people to use the site's gigabyte of images because they simply cost me too much per month to keep it going on my dime, my time. I have to be making something or I will eventually have to shut down.

View my post in announcements for more.

[Rhubarb]

C.D.

Well said and I hope you have a good Summer.

I think I saw a preview of the New Forum this past Weekend, I was quite surprised when I saw it for I couldn't login. It was a good looking homepage. May you prosper on what you have created.

David