Madness

Thanks Rob. Will remove from the slab in the event I'm successful. I'm a collector, not an investor.

I'm not at all experienced with grading, so I'll use the following description provided by the auction house: George III. 1760-1820. AR shilling. 6.04 gm. 25 mm. 1787. His laureate bust right / Arms in cruciform configuration; hearts in the Hanoverian shield. S. 3746. ESC 2129. Good Extremely Fine; proof-like surfaces with mirror lustre and old toning; adjustment marks in obverse flan before striking. Won the coin at auction from Davissons this August: https://davcoin.com/lot/e-auction-26-lot-89 Paid $220 USD (about 170 GBP) but I will sell for 130 GBP plus shipping and am open to offers. The money released will help fund my current die study of 1787 sixpences.

No longer for sale. Have decided to keep it.

This coin will be sticking around. Calmer heads than mine have prevailed. After all, I will be getting to a 1787 shilling die study and it would be a shame to rob myself of resources that will come in handy then.

If I were to win a slabbed MS-65 coin at auction, would it be madness to remove it from its slab? The OCD lunatic within me cries out to put it into a quadrum like all my other coins.

.

Just won this coin at a French mail-bid auction. There is an interesting detail in the final string of the Irish harp in the form of a scroll-shape at the bottom. It's the only example I've identified in my database. Fortunately I was the only bidder.

Hiromi - XYZ Rush - YYZ

Something old Something new Something borrowed Something blue

Example overlay using the method described in the previous post: The two coins compared are a September proof and the coin in the post above. They seem to be in the same matrix family of"17--". The first two digits of both coins are spatially equivalent as there aren't two versions of each evident. The "8" and "7" are in different relative positions as can be seen by the ghostly overlay or "double-vision". Obviously different dies were used to make each coin, not that an overlay comparison was necessary with a proof involved.

I'm at the stage of formulating a methodology for comparison and have been messing around with GIMP. I'd like your feedback! The first stage of my analysis will be to categorise reverse dies by their most easily discernible features. I consider this to be primarily the relative positioning and alignment of the date. Hocking describes two surviving reverse matrices of the sixpences in the RM museum, the first of which is dated "17--" only and the second of which is dated "178-" only (thanks @Rob). This suggests that the last digit or last two digits were hand-punched into the die, confirmed by the wide variation of their relative positions in my sample of about 500. While the figures themselves degraded with die use, their relative positions should not have changed. I intend to use GIMP to align the Irish shield as closely as possible to perfectly horizontal and vertical after which I'll resize the shield so that it becomes 300 pixels across. This will provide an absolute point of reference for each specimen in my database. A foreseeable drawback is that not all of my sample images will be of high enough quality to treat in this manner. It's possible, though, that they would have been unusable in any regard. Here's an experiment I did this morning: The next stage will involve making each edited image semi-transparent and comparing the date positions two at a time, progressively developing categories which may then need to be further refined in order to determine dies. I will also need to ensure that each of my samples is unique. My images have largely come from coins being sold. If they've been sold more than once in the last ten years or so it's possible that they appear more than once in my database. I can't have this as it will throw out my statistical description/inference of the relative number of coins produced by each die. A comparison of toning, mottling, haymarking, die degradation and coin wear should achieve this task. I'm inviting criticism of my proposed methodology from anyone, especially those who've done die studies before. Thanks! Nathan

Every coin photo I have ever taken looks like crap. The images I take resemble the coins in the same way that this painting resembles the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra: I've taken an initial step to improve things by building an ugly-looking rig in an attempt to remove shake-induced blur. I lay my phone (Sony Xperia XZ Premium) flat on the platform with the lens resting over the chiseled-out hole It seems to have achieved its purpose, but I'm finding it hard to get the lighting and settings right so that all the details are captured and the colour looks natural. Could you please pass on your tips and tricks to de-stupidfy me?

After hearing this I'm thinking of taking up flugelhorn:

Thanks for your compliment! I built it myself for about $30 AUD using bits and pieces from Bunnings and a piece of wood I had lying around at home. Would you like me to list the parts and how I made it? I don't know much about photography, but I don't think it's really a copy stand. More of a platform that can be raised and lowered on which I lay my phone. Edit: The only tools you need are a drill, saw, chisel and mallet. If you don't have access to these I'd be happy to make one for you for the cost of parts and shipping. I could probably adapt the design to make something more in line with a proper copy stand. If you wanted to get fancy, I could also mount stands for lighting. Edit 2: Just found this on eBay https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rocwing-Ball-Head-Compact-Photo-Studio-Copy-Stand-for-Macro-Photography/183429636554?hash=item2ab54221ca:g:d2kAAOSwPrlbmQEu Is it suitable for your purposes?

A couple of thoughts have occurred to me: 1. Coins are three dimensional objects, but two-dimensional images capturing them can be hard to interpret due to differences with lighting, camera angle, shadows, reflections etc. Is anyone aware of the application of 3D imaging technology to create a computer model of a coin's surfaces? 2. Has machine-learning technology been applied to die analysis? It should be possible for AI to recognise and contextualise features on coins (such as the position of letters in relation to one another) and compare specimens from a large sample in order to catergorise them into being the products of the same die. Sure, there would be complications like wear and "touch-up" engraving, but it's possible that either AI could learn to account for this, or the AI could do the grunt work while a human interprets the results. Pretty keen to hear your experiences and research.

Is anyone aware of this project relating to computer-aided die studies? Any more info available that you know off the top of your head? http://numismatics.org/pocketchange/cads/

Yes - The first one is very nice and I'm very happy to own it. Good extremely fine? The die looks to have been in good shape when it was struck. Found it on eBay and paid 60 GBP, which I'm guessing is probably better than a reasonable price.

I've collected five varieties of 1787 Sixpences so far. Not happy with the condition (of coin and/or die) of any of them, so will be looking to upgrade as funds allow. NS6 (No Hearts / Serif Type 1 / 6 Strings) NN7 (No Hearts / No Serifs / 7 Strings) NN6 (No Hearts / No Serifs / 6 Strings) HS27 (Hearts / Serif Type 2 / 7 Strings) HN7 (Hearts / No Serifs / 7 Strings) The variety designations and naming scheme are just my method of identifying the examples of 1787 Sixpences that I want to collect. The serif type relates the "7"s in the date and the number of strings refers to the harp in the Hibernian shield.

Never mind...

Just wanted to say thanks again to everyone who's helped out by providing images. I've just emailed each of you a copy of some prelim findings re reverse features. Please let me know if you missed out or have trouble opening the PDF. I'm happy to answer questions about this document, just not publicly at this stage. Please contact me via PM for this purpose. Nathan

@Peckris 2 There's a lady who's sure all that glitters is gold.... Perhaps the descendants of Randy Wolfe, Spirit's guitarist, see something glittering http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-29/stairway-to-heaven-retrial-ordered-by-judge/10320680

Both clips are examples of artists "crossing over": A rock musician singing folk and an Early Music ensemble performing 70's pop. I find these performances moving.