If this isn't "Die Clash" or "Ghosting" - what is it ? [solved]

Looking at the back of these 2 George V pennies, you can see the clear image/outline of George's Head as a reversal of that on the front of the coins.
Is this Die Clash, or Ghosting ?
If it's not, what is the proper term for this effect/error, please ?

I believe thats Ghosting

Thanks.
How is this caused ?
I ask because I've over 500 'early' pre-1927 George pennies, yet only a dozen show this effect.

Ghosting. The head was redesigned slightly in 1926 to stop it.

Thanks again.
But that still begs the question, why on so few coins and why not on every one ?

The pressure of the machinery: too heavy causes ghosting to show through.
A lot of the presses were correctly set; a few were not. Presumably.
Or maybe the metal mixture affected the process. Here is a good link ...

http://24carat.co.uk/frame.php?url=1926modifiedpenny.html
Edited link - looked the same as the one below, but changed it now, so it works.

Thanks again Zac - - - but your link isn't clicking through for me.
Brian

http://24carat.co.uk/frame.php?url=1926modifiedpenny.html

Apology Zac. I'll see if my link to the same page works for me.

It does, and again thanks.
I'll mark the thread "solved"

If the the machine strikes a coin, without the flan being in the machine, the image of one die can damage the other die.
This can create an incuse impression

Petrus, the ghosting effect on 1911-1926 1d's (KM 810) isn't caused by mechanical misdeeds during production, it's due to the design. It was a well known and common problem which lead to two subsequent design changes in 1926 -1927. The lovely high relief portrait of KGV was the problem, great for the WWI service medals but impractical for circulating coins. The type II or modified effigy (KM 826) was the first short lived attempt seen on coins from 1927 and very rarely on the final 1926 issues. The more familiar type III small bust issues from 1928 - 1036 (KM 838) finally resolved the problem.

Interesting Zak.... the link doesn't work but are they suggesting that the ghosting effect was present at the time of release from the mint? From personal observation I've found that ghosting only appears on well circulated coins. I have several UNC type I coins and none of them show any signs of ghosting.

I have a lot of them. Ghosting on the 1d. KM# 810. Love them, looks like the moon in the back ground of Britannia. By the north sea. I have on Netherlands 1 cents even on US 1/2 dollars. The 1976 ones are the easiest to find, with the open field. I would think they were there from the start, but wear make them come out very nicely .

If anyone has a higher grade KM 810 (EF+) which shows the ghosting effect I'd sure appreciate some photos of it.

Hi Phil,

Here is a 1918 with ghosting. Sorry the image isn't better....

Thanks Chris, I'm going to have to check my collection now, I'm intrigued.

Hi Phil,

I would particularly check the 1912,1918 and 1919 Pennys from the Heaton and Kings Norton mints. I have more than 50 of these, and almost all have strong ghosting.

I’m a bit intrigued by this phenomenon, but not satisfied with my lack of understanding.
I have my own ideas, but see no point in putting the cart before the horse.
My question is what causes this thing called “ghosting?”
Maybe I failed to understand the explanation provided by the author at Chard, but it struck me as an incomplete explanation.

From the link provided…
“Because the portrait used on early George V coins featured a large head in quite high relief, there was more metal displaced into the obverse than into the reverse. This often resulted in a "shadow" or "ghost" of the head design showing on the reverse,”

There are three variables that come to mind that may affect the ghosting. Design, alloy and process. In the case of the UK penny, changing the design eliminated the effect, but I still ponder what caused it.
It is sort of like saying cold weather causes snow (when it doesn’t) and observing that in warmer conditions, it doesn’t snow.
If ghosting were caused by greater displacement of metal on one die, then any unmatched die pair would cause this, and it would be very apparent on every coin, token and medal that had a design on only one side.
Any attempts to shed light will be appreciated.

Hi Kurt, now I'm wondering the same thing,

I've always been of the opinion that it was due to the mass of metal in KGV's portrait impacting the reverse during circulation. To sum up briefly why I believe this is the case -

1. The Royal mint didn't begin to address the problem until the 1923 alloy change. It seems inconceivable that the venerable Royal Mint would allow flawed coins to circulate for 12 years without attempting a fix. This suggests to me that the ghosting only appeared after much circulation. However I am taking note of the example provided above of a lightly worn coin showing the effect. I've received several other examples via PM. I guess none of us were around during the early 20's to have first hand experience. Does anyone know of any attempts to address the ghosting issue prior to 1923?

2. I still believe from personal observation that the effect was due to the effects of circulation and that it's most commonly found on worn coins.

Here's what I propose to do. I'll start a new thread as this one has run it's course and we can take an informal survey among members of which dates / mints were affected and the grade of the coins. I've got hundreds of 1d's from the 1911 - 1926 period and I can think of quite a few other members with substantial collections. Once we have a general idea of the distribution of this effect I'll write to the Royal Mint for their comments on the findings.

Pnightingale, I’ve given a little more thought to our topic.
And regret that the scarcity of UK pennies in my collection is going to leave me with more questions than answers. But if there proves to be a correlation between the ghost phenomenon and worn coins, I would want to determine if the metal actually rises in the coins as they wear, or toning makes the already raised metal more apparent.
And if I had to make a guess as to the cause, I would consider “springback.”

From… http://metals.about.com/library/bldef-Springback.htm
Springback, Definition: Condition that occurs when a flat-rolled metal or alloy is cold-worked; upon release of the forming force, the material has a tendency to partially return to its original shape because of the elastic recovery of the material. This is called Springback and influenced not only by the tensile and yield strengths, but also by thickness, bend radius and bend angle.

Consider…



It seems that springback could be a factor in creating the ghost image. And because the properties of the planchet can be altered by the work hardening in the rolling process and softening in the annealing, the amount of springback could vary from one batch of planchets to the next.
And assuming that what we are seeing is caused by springback in the planchet, we are still left with the question of why it occurs only in the UK pennies, and not all of those. If we think of the coining process as a form of work hardening, then not only is the planchet a variable, but the strike pressure, speed and duration is as well.
I wouldn’t call these ideas any more than speculation, but it might be enough to get a little discussion started.

Cool! I have a few of these as well! Didn't know they were any special, just a weak/bad strike.
Now I will add "ghost" in the notes!

Not just pennies; also on half pennies ...

I've hundreds of UK pennies, but I've only got ghosting on about 15% of my George V 1911-1922.
Here's a picture from an EBay listing (281846597679) I have, with one from every year 1912-1921 (No Heatons or King's Norton's in this lot).
I haven't found a VF or better grade coin clearly showing the effect, so the amount of coin wear could be a factor in the visible amount.

Quote: "bmnobbs"​I've hundreds of UK pennies, but I've only got ghosting on about 15% of my George V 1911-1922.
​Here's a picture from an EBay listing (281846597679) I have, with one from every year 1912-1921 (No Heatons or King's Norton's in this lot).
​I haven't found a VF or better grade coin clearly showing the effect, so the amount of coin wear could be a factor in the visible amount.
​

​It is my experience that the Heaton and Kings Norton coins have a higher percentage of coins with ghosting, I would say over 50%. I also have 1913, 1914, and 1918 pennies in XF-Unc that have clear ghosting...Which does not eliminate the idea that wear may be a factor.

As I've just posted on the Great British Coin Survey thread in Free Discussion, I have 27 Heaton and King's Norton pennies. 1912 - 1919 All are poorer than F+, but all 27 show Ghosting.

Hi guys  I have ghosting on mine with another error i can not fathom

The Word PENNY is cut in half it is worn but the line is raised better to see if zoomed in

I would consider the coin may have been struck with a broken die and the wear is uneven because the field is displaced.  VAMmers are aware of this possibility.

Many thanks Kurt i appreciate your reply. Ill look further into these errors  as  I am new and learning . This forum is 👍

Ghosting is relatively common on post WW1 coins up to the re designed effig being introduced 

Just what J. M. Barrie meant by “a bad coinage”. 

Bit of a low ebb for British coinage, went to the 50% silver at that time as well.