1841 Queen Victoria halfpennies.

[VickySilver 775]

I love a nice Vick obverse, regardless of the date. The second-to-last of Non-mort looks to have been hit with fingerprint IMO with subsequent attempt at cleaning or light dip. Parts of the obverse fields have some proof like qualities.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Nice thing about you buying two declan is you got two varieties 

[declan03 149]

1967....i never even noticed. Do you mean the broken E? I wonder why the seller had about 8 of these, all in slightly different conditions?

[Nonmortuus 848]

Yes its the broken E

[scott 129]

aww none left if they are in slightly different conditions, I would say a mint roll... if they are genuine.. wouldn't mind one

[PWA 1967 1,841]

They are 100% genuine and were spot on Scott.

They were on at £60 on Saturday and now at £80 under another account but the same coins ,description etc.

[Nonmortuus 848]

Some pics with my main camera. For the money I cannot complain!

[scott 129]

no one got any spare ones to buy?

[declan03 149]

Haha Scott, sorry, everyone apart from yourself on the forum seems to have one of these half pennies.....you don't really want one, they are quite common now. ?

[mrbadexample 985]

I got the last one.

[declan03 149]

Is it unevenly toned or is it just your pictures? 

[PWA 1967 1,841]

The background is different colours so i would guess the pictures,nice coin though 

[Peter 615]

One of my earliest purchases was a GVF 1841 1/2d for 50p. I was a butchers boy and earned £2 for Saturday morning.Plus the chief butcher always sorted out my Saturday evening tea and occasionally a Sunday roast.Fond memories..This with fruit picking enabled me to buy a FSIE....i wish I still had it because they are now worth 000's.

Edited May 17, 2017 by Peter

[mrbadexample 985]

4 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

The background is different colours so i would guess the pictures,nice coin though 

Yes, don't know why. Taken at the same time in the same place in the same light. 

[Rob 3,002]

30 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

Yes, don't know why. Taken at the same time in the same place in the same light. 

My camera does that too. Welcome to the CPC

[Nick 325]

2 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

Yes, don't know why. Taken at the same time in the same place in the same light. 

It's the automatic white balance calculation in the camera.  The two sides of the same coin can reflect different amounts of light into the camera lens, affecting the calculation of white balance and thus producing slightly different hues.  It can also be caused by your light source changing temperature over time, so always let your lamps fully warm up before taking your pictures.

[mrbadexample 985]

2 hours ago, Nick said:

It's the automatic white balance calculation in the camera.  The two sides of the same coin can reflect different amounts of light into the camera lens, affecting the calculation of white balance and thus producing slightly different hues.  It can also be caused by your light source changing temperature over time, so always let your lamps fully warm up before taking your pictures.

I haven't got any lamps. I put it near the windowsill for a bit of daylight.

[Nick 325]

3 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

I haven't got any lamps. I put it near the windowsill for a bit of daylight.

Just as well I suggested a couple of theories then!

[mrbadexample 985]

9 minutes ago, Nick said:

Just as well I suggested a couple of theories then!

I will get some sort of set up eventually, honest.

[Colin G. 147]

Does anyone else suspect that all of these look to have been lightly cleaned? None of the photos appear to show what I would expect to be a natural colour for a coin of this period. If not cleaned perhaps they were stored somewhere very inappropriately, much like the 1846 farthings that Colin Cooke was selling a few years ago which all had a very unnatural tone.

[declan03 149]

I couldn't say for certain that they,ve not been cleaned. But why have only 7 or 8 of these 1941 half pennies for sale and no other coin sales to his name? As you said Colin, i think whoever stored them never knew their value and never took proper care of them,hence some of the very small marks here and there.

[PWA 1967 1,841]

Some people dont use or know how to use ebay or cant be bothered.

Maybe after selling some, the ones left were given to someone to sell on there behalf.

[mrbadexample 985]

My instinct would be no, I don't think so Colin. Don't rely on my pictures for an accurate representation. 

However, I've been wrong before.

 

[Michael-Roo 777]

 

After our original chat last week, during which we established these were kosher, I also ordered one. Apart from a few minor bag marks its in lovely condition and has lots of original lustre. A common date, but at £50 delivered, it would've been daft not to.

Oh, and I agree with Mr.B, they haven't been cleaned. 

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2017 by Michael-Roo
Photo replacement

[Colin G. 147]

I have no doubt they are genuine, but none of the photos I have seen yet have convinced me that there is not something wrong with the surface. It is difficult because it is not always apparent until they are in hand, some coins just don't like being photographed and I guess this bunch must be a prime example...(by the way I am not knocking your photography skills either, I know how hard it can be and still am often very disappointed with results I get).

I trust the personal opinions of people on here more than the photos....carry on lads fill your boots!!!