1950 D Lincoln Wheat Cent Mint Error - Clipped Planchet (How To ID Clips)

It is true the field rises, but it does not rise as far in as on your coin.

To explain, I created the graphic below. The outer white dotted curve shows the radius where the field near the L starts to rise noticeably as it approaches the rim. The inner white dotted curve shows the radius where the field of the clip starts to rise. The red-enhanced area is the problem area where the field is rising where it should not. Indeed the field rises about the same amount along the length of the "clip".

Perhaps someone could explain how soft coin metal could be "upset" in this area, when the die is very flat there?

Can anyone show another clip that has this characteristic?




Edited to add:

I see some further evidence of tampering wth this coin. I focused on the obverse field adjacent to the "clip", but if you look at the reverse field in same area, instead of the edge being raised (upset?) above the field near the clip, it appears to be recessed below the field. I believe this shows that the "clip" was cut post-mint, with a blade cutting from the reverse. The blade forced the metal downward where it cut, leaving a recessed edge on the reverse and raised edge on obverse. My conclusion would still be this is a very clever counterfeit, but if someone has an explanation for these phenomena consistent with the minting process, I'd be very interested in hearing it.

Sure, but the "rim" should show on both sides. This coins shows asymmetry. There also should not be a rim in areas where only field is present.

After looking at a few of my clipped coins in comparison to TB's beautiful 1950 I believe the age of the die may play some role in the effect mentioned by rpmsrpms on clipped planchets. My 1978 D exhibits the same effect as TB's 1950. The later the die stage more pronounced the deformation of the field and device adjacent to the clip. Conversely, the earlier the die stage (1998) the less pronounced the deformation. The gillig effect.

Rpmsrpms
A ridge like you are seeing on TB's coin would be an artifact from the blanking process, most likely happening as Drag during ejection. This is my 1924 straight clip with a similar ridge, though this one would have been from trimming the edge of the coin metal sheet

A working die is crowned slightly in the center to promote the strike to fill the design details in the middle of the die where they are usually the deepest part of the die.this will enhance the outward flow of coin metal towards the edge as the strike finishes. As I stated earlier, coin metal becomes fluid during the strike and will flow in the path of least resistance, which the void created by the clip certainly is.
The ridge that you see is simply pushed into the void of the clip because there is no resistance to outward movement to force it up into the die.
This outward flow of metal that is not strck away by the field can be seen on this strait clip dime. The IN of the motto shows flow lines of enlarged stretched letters because of the lack of force ,caused by missing metal , to push the coin metal up against the die as it flows towards the collar.

Monday I will be home so I will look to all my clips. Interesting effect, which I think apply only to small clips.

"Since they would have been simultaneously-formed by the two dies coming together, I'd expect symmetry."

Rpm
What I was trying to say was that the ridges on at least the 24 were there pre-strike and were not formed by the dies.
The dime was just an example of the dies not filling in, even where the field should have contacted the planchet.

@NY Islander, thanks for posting the reverses. Indeed these look symmetric, showing similar charateristics on obverse and reverse.

Die Draw is a normal process for any metal deformation, and varies inversely with malleability. However, Die Draw is a bulk process, so if it happens on a coin, the metal would pull back across the entire volume of metal deformed by the die. This would result in a symmetrical thickening of the metal at the edge of the clip, but with the 50-D the "Die Draw" only affected the obverse, which could not happen naturally.

Interestingly, the 24-P "clip" also does not show symmetry in the "Die Draw". The obverse and reverse are significantly asymmetrical, with the reverse showing obvious tooling to hide the edge of the cut. I suspect it is a counterfeit as well.