VickySilver

I will check mine later today for comparison Richard, just to see if it is the same. Many thanks!

Richard, can you post a picture of your matte farthing for a comparo?

Other than the penny, please elucidate and especially with regards to the crown. My concern is that these markers are not widely recognized and certainly I would not want to see any of these markers on non-"VIP" specimens; so to postulate such it would not be enough to see a marker on a purported "VIP" specimen and not on another non-such, as there will be natural die variability & there would have to be an extended study that demonstrated applicability over numerous specimens. The reason that I threw a bit of shade is that with regards to crowns at least, is if the Royal Mint does not recognize differences and from my numerous conversations with Steve Hill amongst others that there are not clear differences. So that there is a spectrum or continuity in what is a proof. BTW, for a fact Bull is wrong with regards to his artificial designations of proof and his "VIP proof" coins of non-standard years. The use of "VIP" has many issues and I do not necessarily agree on its usage on technical terms. BTW, please see my original response to the OP....

Hmmm, I kind of doubt your acquaintance's story. The RM is not aware, even if they are not the end-all. I rather fancy myself to have some knowledge of 20th C proof coins and am not aware of any such "markers".

Yes, I agree, and about the OP coin as well. You can find another, slabbed or not, that will be nicer. Good.

I have a number of MODEL obverse and reverse patterns of the 1920-37 era, and the MODEL side show VERY POOR planchet prep, and this on matte proof presentation pieces. I may have to dig but will have a look at the non-matte silver proofs possibly later today. LOL, John - possibly a bit unfair to lump the OP coin with your example....I still don't see a lot to object to technically, the worst bit IMO may be an horizontal scratch at the right base of neck.

At first I was inclined to agree but have looked at this piece some more. It actually might be a 66, and here's why: - the striations about the bust in the field are likely hairlines from die prep - the apparent abrasions in around hair, neck, brow, cheekbone which used to bother me with these later silver larger denominations florin, HC, and crown are actually in many instances planchet defects that were not fully struck out (planchets/flans are usually only very crudely finished and replete with many marks, abrasions, gouges, etc.) . There was an excellent recent writeup of this, but sadly I can not remember where it was & then I got to thinking and appreciate the veracity of it. - technical grade may well be a "66" However, the aesthetics are not there IMO for these or even other reasons, and so the coin ought to be relegated down a bit by "market grading".

There is what appears on the photo to me at least a bit of haze, almost a green tinge (but not as bad as early very), almost like a light PVC which is oil based. I have sometimes seen this on copper that seemed to have hand or finger oils on them (lightly). If present, and I don't have this coin in hand, the metallic surface but NOT the natural oxidation is preserved but the oil removed with the mentioned technique.

Love those 26MEs...Dare I say that from the photo, a quick acetone treatment might get rid of some of the superficial schmutz - almost a bit of light PVC/finger oil, or??

IMO that verdigris has attacked well into the coin & if successful removal were somehow managed that there would be a lunar sized divot on coin service.

Have to use care, some very nice sans slab and others not so much. Same for slabs as pictures not always showing how it looks in hand...

Excellent addition Shagreen. I have quite a number of these and have looked at them, though not in as great a detail obviously. The TPGs have a hard time in grading this and other coins. The pre-struck flans are often rather less than we would hope and so in addition to the surface alloy issues you have described, they seem to come complete with scratches, marks, and numerous imperfections. I have a number of "MODEL" obverse and reverse coins that show this, and were hit hard by the TPGs, and I believe that they are not always able to separate planchet issues - in fact, on occasion are miserable at it. As a notum: the high points of the devices are the low points of the die, and certainly it might be argued that these are the areas where the flaws show up. One area of interest not affected on your example is the sword and the thigh of St. George. The cheekbone of King George is an area that many times on both this and the Wreath shows what look to be hits and so harder to find specimens without, given that at least some of them may be due to pre-striking planchet issues. Were there any other metals in the alloy?

Very diplomatic on the commentary there Paddy. I concur, please do look at other commentary on the dealer mentioned.

Hmm, that last bit made it sound as though you might be looking for the silver as people not lining up for dross. Here's to hoping there are some nice bits hidden in there...

Yours a good buy, but I find the quality and price of this date to be all over. The TPGs will sometimes give technical grades because there is not wear and perhaps good lustre but not be well struck and overall not attractive. Pick and choose carefully...