2007-P 25c WY DDRs - Why Doubled Die and not Wear or Machine Doubling

[seattleMD]

I was looking through the Die Variety News Vol. 3 No. 3 and was a bit puzzled and frustrated when I saw all the 2007-P 25c WY DDR examples. What makes these examples so clearly DDR and not a case of machine or die deterioration doubling? Based on my experiences at the coincommunity.com forums, I would think most of these would be the later.

[wavysteps]

When all the experts agree that they are doubled dies, it is a drawn conclusion that they are.

Yes, some do appear as if they are machine doubling, however, they have been throughly studied and all indicators point to them being a doubled die.
I wish that I could say more to ease your frustration, but ------

BJ Neff

[seattleMD]

I guess to take my question further, what are those indicators? What are the experts looking at that allow them to make that decision? Perhaps this isn't something that can be discussed in a post on this forum and is much more complicated?

Coming at it another route - are they making that decision off the level of detail available by simply looking at the photos in that magazine? Or is the decision to attribute these cases as DD the result of extensive microscopic inspection?

[diamond]

Perhaps it's something as simple as the presence of multiple coins from the same die pair that show identical doubling. The thing about machine doubling is that it varies in severity (and sometimes direction) through a press run. Then again, perhaps microscopic details allowed the experts to make the distinction. I wasn't involved in making the call.

[wavysteps]

I do not know one major attributer who will make a call on just a photo. All the experts will require in hand examination and only after that examination will they make a call to the nature of the anomaly observed.

It is surprising just how long it takes. I recently sent a 1992 Lincoln cent with an extra pronounced eyelid to four major attributers who all arrived at the same conclusion. It took almost three months for that one coin to complete its rounds.

As to what prompts an expert to call what he or she sees as a doubled die, it is mostly acquired knowledge and experience in the field.

BJ Neff

[seattleMD]

I wish I lived in Colorado Springs and could attend all those attribution classes ...

...

Thanks BJ / Mike.

[JamesWiles]

In many of these listings, I have seen multiples from the same die and all have been examined under higher magnification. But the key is to examine the coin for its charateristics. The doubling is rounded, up off the field, and shows the splits or separation from the main design. Machine Damage Doubling is actually a shearing of the metal away from the main design. If you tilt an MDD coin and look between the images you will see that it is shiney. This is caused by the shearing. There is no shearing on these coins.
My philosophy is to only list those coins where I am confident they are what I say they are. Others tend to list first and prove later. You can rest assured that 99% of the listings in the CONECA files really are doubled dies. I am always re-evaluating suspect coins with newer technology and more experience. Any I am not confident of are delisted.

[diamond]

I have always had confidence in your determinations as to what is, and isn't a doubled die. And I've always appreciated your willingness to re-assess past determinations.

I would like to augment your discussion of machine doubling. While many cases of machine doubling do show the shear you mention, not all do. When the bounce is particularly high, the die comes down lightly on top of the original design, and there is no detectable shear. Instead you have marginal shelving without the shear.

Machine doubling is variable in its expression, and it depends partly on the height of the bounce, the extent of lateral movement, and the timing and duration of the lateral movement.

[seattleMD]

Thanks for the reply and clarification on the detail of your examination, James. I have no reason to doubt your attributions. My post is more about my frustration at my own lack of knowledge than anything.

Looking forward to the examples in your next issue!

Cheers,

Jason

[3˘nicker]

this conversation makes me requestion an anomoly i have found on the utah P quarters. i don't have the pleasure of having a microscope but i have found quite a few of them that have a vertical line on the right side of the stake. i will get pics up when i can but i think they are common enough if you look you might find some. if i remember correctly i think i have found them on different dies but in the same place so it may be as simple as it not being any form of doubling but a mark made when the coin is removed from the anvil?

[wavysteps]

Jimmy - bring one to the next meeting and I'll look at it.

BJ Neff