numidan

Sorry, for dialog box option do not use the value of "-1" ! Just leaving it empty --> Device=

What kind of digital microscope are you using? Is it using a directx (UVC) driver? Normally the software will start and ask you to select the device. You can try manually to set the device. Locate CElanguage3.ini file and open it up with a text editor. Change value for "Device =" ... if it is 0 then 1, if it is 1 then 0 ... -1 value will show a dialog box to select a device when there are more than one. Save file and start the software. Keep me posted.

If you are using Windows and a digital microscope for viewing your coins, then, this software maybe for you. This is the official release of Coin Expert VCV3.0 free for personal use. Much has changed from the previous release. What has changed? • The main GUI window was given a traditional window's like interface using a menu bar instead of function keys. This gives the user access to the various features and tools that Coin Expert offers. • The manual calibration was changed to an easier automatic calibration procedure. It reduces human errors introduced to improve accuracies of measurements and re-drawing of traces. Due to these improvements, previous trace saves will not load correctly. Thus, a new editing tool "Select trace" is available to make vertical and horizontal adjustments to the trace. Properly configured software will perform measurements at least 0.1mm . • A real time histogram can be displayed to properly make adjustments to the lighting and camera's settings. This should improve the quality of pictures taken. • Different ways to take snapshots of camera captured images are now available. A new tool called "Assembly" allows users to take 2 pictures (usually the obverse and reverse sides of the coins) and save it as a jpg picture file with or without a frame, landscape or portrait format. A digital zoom feature can be activated ahead of time and used to adjust the size of image to fit within the frame. • An image file can be loaded and used to make traces. Under view, the user will be able to switch between the image file and the camera's captured frames to perform real-time analysis using the traces and determine differences between them. • All setting are saved when quitting the software and are loaded when starting the software. Changes can be made through the CElanguage3.ini file. • Changes to the right click menu. • The "Comment" tool was removed in this release. Previous released version: http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/...IC_ID=149484 Get it now, no password required, just unzip it. Take time to read the PDF. No installation required. Double click on CPExpertvcv3.exe to start software. (P.S. not an April fools joke! and no viruses) http://depositfiles.com/files/z432i4u4u (follow us on: 5centscanada.ca)

Agree. Keep as is. The coin is honest. Note also the broken serif at the bottom of the 1 in the date. And on the obverse you can see quite clearly the "honi" on the queen's shoulder - honi of honi soit qui mal y pense i.e. "Shamed be he who thinks evil of it", which seems appropriate? Almost! "Evil be to him who evil thinks" (Or "Shame", as you say, for a literal translation). Thanks Peckris. I preferred the use of "shame" in this instance to go with the theme of it being a shame to dip etc the coin. Too right! Though I wonder - has anyone actually dipped a copper? Wonder what effect it would have... I usually try to clean the verdigris off copper coins using electrolysis. But there is a risk of pitting If you want to try, do not use common salt as the electrolyte!

Either wear or a partially filled die. For some years (1920 for example) these are quite common and not generally considered collectible. I will agree with Rob and Accumulator. An extra comment: I will not pay a premium for an error that can be easily reproduced in my garage! A file, some sand paper and voila, colon disappeared.

I agree 5 over 5 there if you offset the top bar by the same distance as the bottom loop they will match. I tried the same thing and I agree with Colin that they match. The question I have, why is the lower 5 not as thick as the complete higher 5? When the digit is recut it causes metal displacement which narrows the gaps that would have previously existed... well that is my logical explanation Thank you Colin. Upon reflection, I decided to estimate the 5's highest points of the relief and this is what I came up with.

I agree 5 over 5 there if you offset the top bar by the same distance as the bottom loop they will match. I tried the same thing and I agree with Colin that they match. The question I have, why is the lower 5 not as thick as the complete higher 5?

I did not find this listed anywhere. Would you consider this as a repunched 8 or double 8?

That looks great, Numidan! The only thing that sprung to mind was how strike weakness could be factored into the equation? Superb idea though, which for the main part could work! At the end of the day a grade's a grade! Bag marks, edge knocks, etc, only affect appeal, and consequently value! Would be a very good start to get the grade right! I'm still trying to work out what the diagrams are of I'm assuming of something that someone could use in grading terms. -5 being good and -50 poor etc. I thought Derek Riley brought out a book for such requirements? Grading is always going to be subjective, no matter how we all think, we've seen it so MANNNNNNY times on this forum where we as experienced collectors do not agree, so we should basically pass that subject by and work on the rest. The diagram (section of king George V's crown on Canadian coins) was presented to prove a point, there maybe other ways to grading. It was not there to teach someone how it works, so do not assume, it is a bit more complex than that. If your method works, good for you, I respect that, but it did not work for me and I am guessing, it is not working for many others since forums are full of buyers complaining about the grade of their new purchases. How many of you, picked up a coin in your collection that you had previously graded, and wondered why you attributed that grade and changed it? That is objectivity at its best. Believe me, next time you will take the same coin, you will change its grade ... again. I was fed up always second guessing the grade. After searching the internet for Mr. Riley's book and I found an excerpt of it. It looks like a great reference book but it uses the same old methodology. People have to guess what grade their coins are, based on pictures. But the things I do liked about this book, pictures are clear and the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy. Thank you, Azda. I do agree with you that we should basically pass that subject, I am satisfied with my grading skills and do not need to prove anything to anyone. Your diagram appraoch is certainly different, and I'm sure useful especially with particular features on particular coins. But I'm surprised by your verdict on Derek's book? Far from being the ''same old methodology" it's a radical new approach using photos of all the major UK design types in various states of preservation - just the thing for a beginner, I would have thought. I'm unsure why you think it's lacking? It takes the guesswork OUT of grading, especially for beginners. Also, you say your diagram approach is to measure "die wear", but surely we are talking coin wear here, not die wear? Die wear is a more subtle thing and shows itself in the quality of the strike, but has to be judged more by the experienced eye, or a helpful dealer. You are right Peckris, I did write die wear but I meant coin wear. Sorry for the confusion. It might have not come out right but I did credit Derek's work by writing that I liked the fact that "the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy".

That looks great, Numidan! The only thing that sprung to mind was how strike weakness could be factored into the equation? Superb idea though, which for the main part could work! At the end of the day a grade's a grade! Bag marks, edge knocks, etc, only affect appeal, and consequently value! Would be a very good start to get the grade right! I'm still trying to work out what the diagrams are of I'm assuming of something that someone could use in grading terms. -5 being good and -50 poor etc. I thought Derek Riley brought out a book for such requirements? Grading is always going to be subjective, no matter how we all think, we've seen it so MANNNNNNY times on this forum where we as experienced collectors do not agree, so we should basically pass that subject by and work on the rest. The diagram (section of king George V's crown on Canadian coins) was presented to prove a point, there maybe other ways to grading. It was not there to teach someone how it works, so do not assume, it is a bit more complex than that. If your method works, good for you, I respect that, but it did not work for me and I am guessing, it is not working for many others since forums are full of buyers complaining about the grade of their new purchases. How many of you, picked up a coin in your collection that you had previously graded, and wondered why you attributed that grade and changed it? That is objectivity at its best. Believe me, next time you will take the same coin, you will change its grade ... again. I was fed up always second guessing the grade. After searching the internet for Mr. Riley's book and I found an excerpt of it. It looks like a great reference book but it uses the same old methodology. People have to guess what grade their coins are, based on pictures. But the things I do liked about this book, pictures are clear and the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy. Thank you, Azda. I do agree with you that we should basically pass that subject, I am satisfied with my grading skills and do not need to prove anything to anyone.

My response to point number 1 When I started coin collecting, knowing how to grade became my first priority. You would not believe the time I spent to figure it out. The problem is that the current grading system is purely based on objectivity. Coin grading companies exists so that the current system can be accepted by all. Think about it, we rely on one or two individuals to objectively grade the coins, during their good days and bad days, and by magic, no one will dispute the grade. When I decided to introduce a scientific approach to grading and tested it out on another forum. Within a week or so, all those that participated were able to evaluate a circulated certified coin and obtain almost the same grade within ½ a grade point. That was not bad considering that objectivity cannot be completely removed. So, I was encouraged to present this method, wow, there is a lot of resistance out there. Sample of the scientific approach giving a value to different levels of die wear. So, until an organization standardizes grading and is willing, for example, to enumerate how much bag marks are acceptable for ms65 and list required characteristics, there will always be disagreement and coin grading companies grabbing your money. Sorry for letting off some steam.

Here is a slide show that you might find interesting. http://www.usmint.gov/mint_tours/?action=vtShell

This would be true if you only have one press producing the coins and one rolling/bagging machine. Usually, when the mint is ready to produce large quantities of coins, they install the working dies in the presses. Now, if one working die has some damage or has been reworked and creating a variety, was used for a press say out of 10, then 10% of the coins would be of a different variety. Then, all the coins are sent to mamy bagging machines, making it possible that some bags have more variety coins then others.

In fact, not only does it depend on the blank being off-center but also a loss of piston pressure on the press. Here is an illustration that I presented on a French forum to help understand why on some coins, there maybe longer teeth. The first picture shows the chamber. I've exaggerated the curvature of the working dies to understand the flow of metal of the blank. The second image is to help understand that the process is similar to rolling pie dough, metal flowing to the extremities. It helps that the working dies are convex. The third image shows the contact points between the blank's rim and edge of working dies where the teeth are located. The fourth image is a magnification of the contact point between the working die and the blank’s rim. If there is a loss of pressure, metal flow will not be complete and the teeth will be longer and deeper in the blank's rim. Hope this helps

Sorry AardHawk for the late response. Here are images of a different section of the coin, hope this is okay with you.