2005 P Oregon 25c Business Strike - DDO?

[Russellhome]

I found 3 of these in a BU roll of 2005 P Oregon quarters. There is also a guy on eBay selling what appears to be the same thing. At first, I thought it was a double-ear DDO. But lighting the area from different angles, yields different looks that don't appear to follow the conture of the ear? Is it a DDO? Perhaps a die clash? Both? Neither?

Here are 3 photos of the same coin with different lighting...







Your thoughts, please.

[Dick]

Ken, it looks like you do have the DDO. I can't make the same effect, no matter which ay I turnit. Nce going!.
Dick

[Bob P]

It is very possible it is a doubled ear lobe, but the shape doesn't seem right. That of course doesn't mean it isn't.
Another anomaly that affects that part of the coin on the statehood quarters is a die clash. I have a few examples where the clash left raised areas rather than incused. Ultimately, I would have to see it in hand to verify it. There are two known Minnesota doubled earlobes, and one Oregon doubled earlobe.

[Russellhome]

I finally had cause to send another submission in to Billy Crawford - and I included this possible Oregon DDO (shown above). Turns out, it is a die clash. Billy pointed out a remnant on the reverse and lots of areas of die scratches/polishing to cover up other clash remnants. I did a quick overlay of a regular OR quarter - and now I can easly see what caused the obverse marks (the edge of Wizard Island).



Another Oregon quarter I submitted to Billy did turn out to be a minor doubled die. The 2005 P OR DDR-003 that Ken Potter has list shows a small ridge to the south of the waterline of the island (source of the doubling). This 2005 D SMS DDR is the same kind of doubling -- but this time to the north. Not major and kind of hard to spot (not being in the field) - but I'll take it.

[Bob P]

Very cool Ken. What makes these even more interesting is that these doubled dies were not supposed to happen any more. I am thinking that if we carefully examine the statehood quarters from 1999 onward, we would probably find more doubled dies of some sort.
I just got an email from John Wexler about the Minnesota doubled dies. I had sent him a bunch that I had found that weren't listed, and it ended up where almost all of them were new. I also discovered a new DDO for them He now lists 3 DDOs for the Minnesota Quarter. His number of attributed varieties is 100 for the Minnesota quarter, and after a recent shipment from another collector, he expects even more. I also expect Ken Potter to get back to listing them pretty soon.
All in all, it certainly keeps the hobby jumping, and I couldn't be happier.
Good eyes on your Oregon Doubled die. I don't know if I would have ever spotted that one.

[coppercoins]

I disagree that the coin in question is a die clash. In order for a die clash to show that strongly in the recessed part of the design around the ear the fields would have to be very strongly clashed. The first part affected by die clashes is the field, THEN the relief areas. This mark is in the area of highest relief on the coin.

I don't know what the mark is, but my vote is that it's NOT from a die clash. I also see no evidence of a doubled die, but it could be some form of die wear or even possibly polishing doubling.

[Russellhome]

But wouldn't the recessed area under the ear be the highest part of the die? And the field under the island on the reverse would be the highest part of the reverse die. My overlay may be a bit off (I think the coins were at a slight angle when I took the photos). If the island were just a little lower than I show, the field area along the bottom edge of the island could be responsible for the clash-like marks.

[eagames]

Ken,

The die is the opposite of the coin so the entire portrait is an impression into the die. When there's clash the flattest surfaces hit but the impressed areas (lettering and portrait) would not hit. I would expect no clashing in the portrait. For example on the reverse you might see the outline of the edges of the portrait, the shallowest part. On the obverse you might see an outline of the reverse design in the fields around the portrait.

I could be wrong, I have seen on this forum a few cents where the lowest (shallowest) parts of the partrait did get clashed but near the ear is very deep.

It seems unlikely to be from clash, maybe damage from something else.

[coppercoins]

No, they wouldn't...the highest parts of the coin are the lowest parts of the die. That's why the field is affected first in a clash. Remember that the relief on the die is exactly the opposite of the relief on the coin.

[Russellhome]

[Russellhome]

I think the Lincoln Cent obverse is a different story. Particularly on the older cents, the entire bust is pretty high relief. But on the new Washington Quarter design, the relief is kind of an illusion. To get the ear and hair to appear in such high relief, the neck area under the ear is recessed -- approaching the level of the field. It still 'strikes' me that it may be clash marks. As said in the last message, Wexler has it now - and I'd be happy to share his opinion when I find out.

Here is a Maine 25c die clash that I've got. If the ear area is such high relief, it most likely would not have shown as an inverted ear so clearly.

[Russellhome]

I emailed Wexler a link to this post and it looks like he has already had a chance to examine the coin in question. Here is what he had to say.

[Dick]

That is a die clash. The shape of the "clash", is the exact reverse of the hair-ear-hair curvature.
Dick