Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Rob said:

It is probably a reflection of the reserve demanded by the vendor. You cannot have a reserve higher than top estimate, so if one sold on eBay for 700 and the vendor wants/expects 500, then the estimate must reflect the reserve. Nobody has to buy, and LCA get a fee for listing from the vendor whatever the outcome.

The catalogue is a complete train wreck <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azda said:

The catalogue is a complete train wreck <_<

I agree with Dave that they were particularly careless this time. Whilst mistakes are unavoidable, even the most cursory inspection would find these odd photos in the hammered section.

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?searchlot=1722&searchtype=2&page=Catalogue

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?searchlot=1816&searchtype=2&page=Catalogue

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?searchlot=1817&searchtype=2&page=Catalogue

I wouldn’t say it’s quite a bad as a train wreck, more like Windows 8 when it was first released. ;)

 

Edited by Sword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sword said:

I agree with Dave that they were particularly careless this time. Whist mistakes are unavoidable, even the most cursory inspection would find these odd photos in the hammered section.

I wouldn’t say it’s quite a bad as a train wreck, more like Windows 8 when it was first released. ;)

 

Have they laid the wrong suit, or gone out of turn? One must assume the latter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rob said:

Have they laid the wrong suit, or gone out of turn? One must assume the latter

The pictures in the hammered section are of milled coins, at least 4 or 5 of them, never went any further after that, couldn't be arsed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A real shambles of a catalogue, lots of quite odd mistakes with many over graded coins. Not for me this time round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/02/2017 at 9:43 PM, TomGoodheart said:

Yours is at least nEF Dave.  Theirs probably gVF by Spink but lacks eye appeal.  IMHO

Hammered%20Grading%202015%20Spink%202_zp

Does anybody know which book this would have come from? I am trying to make the leap into some hammered and early milled examples but I am finding myself struggling with the grading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Nonmortuus said:

Does anybody know which book this would have come from? I am trying to make the leap into some hammered and early milled examples but I am finding myself struggling with the grading.

Spink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SAXON KENT said:

A real shambles of a catalogue, lots of quite odd mistakes with many over graded coins. Not for me this time round.

It boosts prices and profits ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nonmortuus said:

Does anybody know which book this would have come from? I am trying to make the leap into some hammered and early milled examples but I am finding myself struggling with the grading.

Yeah, I copied it from the 2015 Spink Coins of England for quick reference.  To be honest, a handful of pics like that probably aren't all that helpful to you.  Perhaps better to check a dealer website that has a variety of stock and reasonable grading skills.

Also (I think) it's important to remember that strict grade (ie the amount of wear a coin has been subject to since it was made) isn't always the best measure with hammered coins.  Individual variations can mean an unworn coin which was weakly struck is less appealing than one that was stronger and has circulated a bit.  Then there's toning, how a coin compares to the usually encountered examples ..  I (and a few people I know) tend to talk more about 'eye appeal' than grade with hammered coins.

P9170513_zpsprklqjox.jpg

The above shilling for example, is worn (easiest to see on the rim which can be almost sharp enough to cut your fingers on truly unworn coins) and is weak in places (such as the shoulder) where the flan is thinner.  I grade quite strictly, if at all, and I guess I'd personally call it nVF if I was feeling generous (it was sold as VF).  And it's also double struck (another challenge with hammered coins!) and has a flan split!

However the portrait is (fairly unusually) clear and it's pleasantly toned and on a nice broad round flan and so I like it better than other, more crisply struck or higher graded coins.  For me it has good eye appeal.  If that makes sense?

Edited by TomGoodheart
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies, I have been looking at Charles 1st shillings etc and have been trying to find examples that are un clipped, fairly central and have a good portrait. I have yet to make a purchase but I am trying to get more confident on what I view as a good coin before I take the plunge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TomGoodheart said:

Yeah, I copied it from the 2015 Spink Coins of England for quick reference.  To be honest, a handful of pics like that probably aren't all that helpful to you.  Perhaps better to check a dealer website that has a variety of stock and reasonable grading skills.

Also (I think) it's important to remember that strict grade (ie the amount of wear a coin has been subject to since it was made) isn't always the best measure with hammered coins.  Individual variations can mean an unworn coin which was weakly struck is less appealing than one that was stronger and has circulated a bit.  Then there's toning, how a coin compares to the usually encountered examples ..  I (and a few people I know) tend to talk more about 'eye appeal' than grade with hammered coins.

P9170513_zpsprklqjox.jpg

The above shilling for example, is worn (easiest to see on the rim which can be almost sharp enough to cut your fingers on truly unworn coins) and is weak in places (such as the shoulder) where the flan is thinner.  I grade quite strictly, if at all, and I guess I'd personally call it nVF if I was feeling generous (it was sold as VF).  And it's also double struck (another challenge with hammered coins!) and has a flan split!

However the portrait is (fairly unusually) clear and it's pleasantly toned and on a nice broad round flan and so I like it better than other, more crisply struck or higher graded coins.  For me it has good eye appeal.  If that makes sense?

Love that portrait. I think the double struck bell mint mark is kind of cute rather than distracting. If only there is no flan split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sword said:

Love that portrait. I think the double struck bell mint mark is kind of cute rather than distracting. If only there is no flan split.

Always regard it as part of the history of these coins, not many of these shillings are perfect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nonmortuus said:

Thanks for the replies, I have been looking at Charles 1st shillings etc and have been trying to find examples that are un clipped, fairly central and have a good portrait. I have yet to make a purchase but I am trying to get more confident on what I view as a good coin before I take the plunge.

Well, you can always post a pic here for opinions!  You'll find a fair few Chas I here Lloyd Bennett in various conditions and might find it interesting to look through to get an idea of how they vary in condition and price.  Lloyd sold the Alan Morris' collection of coins (mostly shillings and half crowns) of Charles I over a number of years and it's a good representative selection I think.  There are also auction catalogues with a high proportion of Chas I shillings, but unless you wanted to specialise it's easier to use an online reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SAXON KENT said:

A real shambles of a catalogue, lots of quite odd mistakes with many over graded coins. Not for me this time round.

Schoolboy howler of an error

Can't believe they can be this careless.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Schoolboy howler of an error

Can't believe they can be this careless.

 

There are probably dozens (and I am not joking) of errors of the same type. Now I can understand why the catalogue was described as a train wreck.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem appears to only be with the online catalogue. The printed images all look ok.

I know what they have done. The error images are all for sale no 154 as far as I can see. e.g lot 1896 was a 1675 farthing, so you have a Vicky crown obverse paired with a 1675 farthing reverse. Similarly, lot 1916 shows the same image as the catalogue for the reverse of lot 1916 in sale 154.

I'm sure they will realise soon and sort it. Though if a case of copy and paste when creating the listings, they might be a while.

Edited by Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Rob said:

The problem appears to only be with the online catalogue. The printed images all look ok.

I know what they have done. The error images are all for sale no 154 as far as I can see. e.g lot 1896 was a 1675 farthing, so you have a Vicky crown obverse paired with a 1675 farthing reverse. Similarly, lot 1916 shows the same image as the catalogue for the reverse of lot 1916 in sale 154.

I'm sure they will realise soon and sort it. Though if a case of copy and paste when creating the listings, they might be a while.

Impressive that you have worked it out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sword said:

Impressive that you have worked it out!

Single errors are usually one-offs. Multiple errors are frequently global one-offs. I hope for their sake that you can identify a section of code, enter the correct phrase, and hit return. Somewhere will be 154 instead of 156 surrounded by a lot of computer speak. If it is possible to do a global adjustment, then it should take a couple of seconds to rectify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2017 at 10:16 AM, Leo said:
37 minutes ago, Rob said:

Single errors are usually one-offs. Multiple errors are frequently global one-offs. I hope for their sake that you can identify a section of code, enter the correct phrase, and hit return. Somewhere will be 154 instead of 156 surrounded by a lot of computer speak. If it is possible to do a global adjustment, then it should take a couple of seconds to rectify.

To err is human. To really foul things up you need a computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about above messed up post.

This thread has been behaving strangely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jaggy said:

 

The computer is just the icing on the cake. At least a human has the capacity to question their actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sword said:

There are probably dozens (and I am not joking) of errors of the same type. Now I can understand why the catalogue was described as a train wreck.

Yes.

You'd think they would have some form of effective QA (Quality Assurance) over what had been listed, before it was released to the internet. I'm not usually a hypercritical person, as we all make mistakes, but the sheer quantity on this occasion, really does seem a bit amateurish. Hopefully, LCA will pick up on their errors and rectify.     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the quantity that makes me think it might be a single action that did it. If it was a case of copy and paste text you might get 3 or 4 images with the wrong file name, but it shouldn't take long to recognise that 154 has replaced 156, particularly as it is often pairs of mismatched images and so the good will be in close proximity to the bad.

Occasional lines of faulty instruction are easy to make simply from looking away from the screen and returning to it at a different place. Can't criticise anyone for that as we all do it on a day to day basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^_^

Screenshot 2017-02-16 11.02.59.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike is right in that they should have checked it (even if quickly) before it went online. 

I am not trying to be cynical but I am not certain if they could be bothered to correct all those mistakes. After all, they couldn't be bothered to fix the LCGS section of their website. There are still numerous  mentions of CGS Ltd and missing photos. 

And it  is only 16 days to the auction. The mistakes won't matter soon ... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×