Got $50 in 2007-D Washington dollars and ...

dcarr · February 15, 2007 3:31PM

The nicest one out of the two rolls was this one (MS-64 at best).
PS: I'm talking about the one on the left. The one on the right is MS-68

cullenbryant · February 15, 2007 4:49PM

did you design the one on the right? i like the design much better. nice job.
looks much more colonial.
were you able to submit this design for consideration?

Cam40 · February 15, 2007 4:55PM

i,d almost bet that `64` would be a 7 across the street.
thats the deal though.
how strict are the grading standards going to be for this new series?
wouldnt very many coins have to be looked at before a consensus is
established?

itsnotjustme · February 16, 2007 12:10AM

Is that a fang growing from th ebottom of his nose?

dcarr · February 16, 2007 3:09AM

<< did you design the one on the right? i like the design much better. nice job.
looks much more colonial.
were you able to submit this design for consideration? >>

Thanks,
Yes I designed and sculpted the one on the right. Although I designed it well before any images of President coins were released by the US Mint, I did not submit the design to them. They don't accept artwork submissions from outside the Mint at this time.

The reason that I made the medallion is because I was commissioned by CSN to mint a set of the first four President coins. They were offered for sale during December and January on TV on CSN and HSN. They were sold as a set of four "Presidential Preview Medallions". It was an interesting way to have something to offer in the realm of President coins before anyone else.

Now here is the ironic part to all this. In June of 2005, the US Mint announced a job opening for a "Medallic Artist". They were looking for a person who had experience with digital technology and computerized engraving. Well, that is what I do every day. In fact, I wrote my own software to sculpt designs digitally, and engrave them with a computer-controlled milling machine. That is how I made this Washington concept dollar. So I figured that I had a good shot at that job. But I didn't get an interview. Oh well, I'm sure they had numerous qualified applicants. But here is the ironic part. The person that they hired for that job, Joseph Menna, is the artist who sculpted the US Mint's Washington dollar obverse. But it looks to me like it was sculpted using the traditional method (by hand using clay/plaster - not an easy task). I do not know for certain, however. But in any case, I viewed this project as sort of a design competition between myself and the US Mint. The US Mint's typical style is sometines a bit "harsh" for my tastes. I like to employ a more subtle and smoother relief. But it really isn't a fair comparison because the Mint has certain restrictions for high-volume production that must be adhered to. But the overall relief height on my medallion is about the same as the US Mint's Washington dollar.

PS: Here is the reverse side

EricSan · February 16, 2007 3:43AM

Wow, Dcarr! Your design is MUCH nicer looking! Its always amazing to see the skills of others - thanks for sharing!

Eric

cullenbryant · February 16, 2007 5:14AM

interesting story. With the background now it appears, that this had a long, but possible shot at being the design,
based of mr. menna getting the job and having his design adopted.

Yours is way better though, it's not even close.
i can't imagine anyone denying that. thanks for posting.

speety · February 16, 2007 5:17AM

I agree, Dcarr your design is much better

fastrudy · February 16, 2007 5:18AM

I like your representation of the statue of liberty. Good Job!!

Burks · February 16, 2007 6:08AM

Poor George looks like someone just pee'd in his Cheerios.

joeyuk · February 16, 2007 7:19AM

<< In fact, I wrote my own software to sculpt designs digitally, and engrave them with a computer-controlled milling machine. >>

Isn't that why they excluded you from some quarter competitions? Now they want it. Ironic.

kwmorgan · February 16, 2007 7:55AM

I like dcarr's obverse married with the mint reverse. That would have been a nice combo.

BECOKA · February 16, 2007 8:03AM

I like the one on the right. The one on the left looks like he woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

It's also nice to see that the Mint is refusing great talent. They need to keep up the latest track record of mediocre designs.

messydesk · February 16, 2007 8:07AM

I like aspects of both designs, actually. While I'll agree that GW is too harshly cartoonish and low relief on the mint's rendidtion, I also think Dan's portrait is a little too soft, which contrasts too much with the outline of the portrait. It probably wouldn't wear terribly well, either. Sharpen it up a little and blend the edge of the design into the field rather than cutting it off at the field and it would be much better than the mint's. I like the mint's composition for the reverse better, although for some reason it does have a gaming token look to it. Is it the large denomination? Missing date? A full view of the Statue of Liberty might not look much like the Status of Liberty upon a cursory glance at the coin itself, much in the manner as Sweden and Finland has been pointed out not to look like Sweden and Finland on the 1 and 2 Euro coins. What I can't tell is which has higher relief. I assume Dan's does, since the mint goes out of their way to produce the lowest relief possible.

A third design I'd like to see would be one done in a hand-engraved and hand-punched die by Ron Landis. It would make for an interesting comparison of the results you get with three totally different approaches to the execution.

Just some honest opinions from someone who wishes he could play around with designing coinage. Nice work, Dan.

INXS · February 16, 2007 8:12AM

<< They need to keep up the latest track record of mediocre designs. >>

That sentence says it all.

Great job Dcarr that is a superb medallion.

pb2y · February 16, 2007 8:19AM

What is the best deal? $25.00 at the bank or $35.95 plus postage from the US Mint.

dcarr · February 16, 2007 8:37AM

<< I like aspects of both designs, actually. While I'll agree that GW is too harshly cartoonish and low relief on the mint's rendidtion, I also think Dan's portrait is a little too soft, which contrasts too much with the outline of the portrait. It probably wouldn't wear terribly well, either. Sharpen it up a little and blend the edge of the design into the field rather than cutting it off at the field and it would be much better than the mint's. I like the mint's composition for the reverse better, although for some reason it does have a gaming token look to it. Is it the large denomination? Missing date? A full view of the Statue of Liberty might not look much like the Status of Liberty upon a cursory glance at the coin itself, much in the manner as Sweden and Finland has been pointed out not to look like Sweden and Finland on the 1 and 2 Euro coins. What I can't tell is which has higher relief. I assume Dan's does, since the mint goes out of their way to produce the lowest relief possible.

A third design I'd like to see would be one done in a hand-engraved and hand-punched die by Ron Landis. It would make for an interesting comparison of the results you get with three totally different approaches to the execution.

Just some honest opinions from someone who wishes he could play around with designing coinage. Nice work, Dan. >>

Thanks,
Your comments make sense. While I didn't have the same high-volume production restrictions that the US Mint had, I still had to deal with a substantial production of 10,000 units. I found that to produce the best-looking portrait of Washington, smoother sculpting was helpful. I didn't want a harsh look. But I also had to have a clear delineation between the bust and the fields because the same dies were to be used for striking proof versions as well as satin-finish pieces (like the one shown). The way mine is engraved, you could sandblast and polish the dies multiple times before any part of the perimeter of the portrait would be worn away.

I just took out my calipers and measured the maximum relief height (from the field to the tip of the nose). The relief height on the US Mint coin measures 0.019" . The relief height on my medallion measures 0.019". They are identical in that respect.

After having sculpted many front-on portraits, I don't believe that one can be engraved directly into a die by hand with satisfactory results. Profile portraits are a whole lot easier. But front-on portraits usually don't seem to come out well when executed by hand directly on the face of a die. I'd also like to see Ron Landis give it a try !

dcarr · February 16, 2007 8:54AM

<< 

<< In fact, I wrote my own software to sculpt designs digitally, and engrave them with a computer-controlled milling machine. >>

Isn't that why they excluded you from some quarter competitions? Now they want it. Ironic. >>

I think there are three different situations that you may be thinking of.

First was the situation with the Wisconsin quarter. I did an "Old Abe" (famous eagle) design in collaboration with Michael Koerner from Wisconsin (he posts here sometimes). At the state level, it was one of 13 finalists at one point. But the word is that in final deliberations by the state committee, it was decided that our design looked "too professional" and might skew the voting bt the public. So it was excluded. Michael knows the details. But all of this happened at the state level before it ever got to the Mint.

Second, when the US Mint asked me to revise my entry in the official Sacagawea design contest, I wanted to submit it in this form (as I had designed it):

But I was instructed to submit it only as a line drawing, so I manipulated it into this (see red arrow):

The third incident was when I applied for the US Mint's "Artistic Infusion Program" (AIP). All AIP applicants had to design a hypothetical coin and submit the artwork with the application. The instructions stated that the designs had to be done in pencil or ink. I called the Mint and asked if I could do it as a computer rendering, printed in ink. They said no - it had to be done by hand on paper.

I suppose they just wanted a level playing field - fair enough.

chiefbob · February 16, 2007 9:08AM

Wow. The Sac design of your is beautiful. Subtle, yet very powerful. You obviously have great talent, Dcarr! It's the Mint's loss that yours wasn't accepted.

ricko · February 16, 2007 9:11AM

Dcarr, your designs are, in my opinion, superior by far in each case. You demonstrate the 'artistic' component that current mint products lack. Thank you, Cheers, RickO

Bikingnut · February 16, 2007 9:15AM

They are about the ugliest thing I've seen from the mint in a ling time.

Dennis

57loaded · April 21, 2007 2:37AM

I do like your designs and also the way you incorporated Peace onto the reverse, similar to the Indian Peace Medallions.

If your Reverse Geo. W had made it...no smooth edge errors!

OnlyBuffalos · April 21, 2007 3:18AM

It probably wouldn't wear terribly well, either.

That probably will not be a factor given the public's acceptance of a dollar coin.

zenny · April 21, 2007 3:56AM

As always, Dcarr, wonderful design and execution.

Love the scalloped edges, especially on the reverse!

z

Coxe · April 21, 2007 4:07AM

Any new state quarter designs? A Hawaii Five-O one would be cool.

ModernCrapNut · April 21, 2007 4:37AM

<< Is that a fang growing from th ebottom of his nose? >>

Looks more like a booger. Even though I like moderns, I think the Washington design is ugly and I don't expect much improvement.

The alternate designs are great. Would love to have them available in proof or reverse proof.

Got $50 in 2007-D Washington dollars and ...

Comments

Leave a Comment