Penny Acquisition of the week

[1949threepence 3,366]

I wouldn't normally include a common or garden penny acquisition from George V, but am doing so on this occasion to exemplify a point. 

Now I've started to collect this series, a few things have quickly become very apparent to me. Whilst it is relatively easy to obtain high grade examples, the trick is to get high grade examples that are good strikes, with as much hair detail as possible, issue free and if at all possible, without ghosting being obvious, especially on pre 1926 examples. It's worth watchiing and waiting for these better examples to come up. Not going to be possible in every case, but I think this 1912 captures most of those qualities, although still a little thin on Britannia's chest, which is another common weak point.  Incidentally, the obverse colour is close to actuality. Not sure why the reverse looks different in the pic.

(There are many high grade specimens with full lustre, but the strikes are really poor, and the King often appears to have a bald head.)

 

   

   

[PWA 1967 1,840]

For what its worth Mike 1911,12,13 both F174 ,  F177 &14 you should be able to find quite easily with a good strike.The ones much harder are 1915,16,17,18  & 19 ,these are coins from 1911-1920.

Edited November 16, 2018 by PWA 1967

[1949threepence 3,366]

20 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

For what its worth Mike 1911,12,13 both F174 ,  F177 &14 you should be able to find quite easily with a good strike.The ones much harder are 1915,16,17,18  & 19 ,these are coins from 1911-1920.

Indeed, the wartime years and just after, Pete. Yes, I had noticed that those years are especially difficult. 

[terrysoldpennies 691]

Talking of poor strikes during the war years, this one has to be the worst I have ever seen.  And its uncirculated    

 

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Thats a good one Terry compared with some at least on the REV the breastplate and lower part of the helmet show A lot of them have a weak OBV and can assure you there are much worse than that one.

Its also quite common for the top part RHS of the Y in penny to be very weak for some reason.

Edited November 16, 2018 by PWA 1967

[1949threepence 3,366]

23 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Talking of poor strikes during the war years, this one has to be the worst I have ever seen.  And its uncirculated    

 

Is that the one DNW had for bid a few days ago, Terry?

[terrysoldpennies 691]

4 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Is that the one DNW had for bid a few days ago, Terry?

It could be ??? 

[1949threepence 3,366]

4 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

It could be ??? 

I thought about it for a few minutes then dismissed the idea. As you say the coin is UNC, almost BU, but the strike is appallingly bad. 

[RLC35 288]

35 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

I thought about it for a few minutes then dismissed the idea. As you say the coin is UNC, almost BU, but the strike is appallingly bad. 

That coin might have been a early strike where they were setting the pressure on the press, preparing for a production run.....

[1949threepence 3,366]

37 minutes ago, RLC35 said:

That coin might have been a early strike where they were setting the pressure on the press, preparing for a production run.....

Hmm, and yet Bob, it gives all the impression of a worn out die. 

 

[secret santa 2,013]

3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Not sure why the reverse looks different in the pic.

And your background blanket/jumper/whatever is a completely different colour too. Did you have a different setting on the camera ?

[1949threepence 3,366]

14 minutes ago, secret santa said:

And your background blanket/jumper/whatever is a completely different colour too. Did you have a different setting on the camera ?

Not knowingly, but looking at the control panel, there are numerous different colour shades which can be used on the pic once taken. Also just tried pointing my camera again, and the shading seems to alter automatically with the tilt. Will have to pay careful attention to that problem.   

[Rob 2,998]

17 minutes ago, secret santa said:

And your background blanket/jumper/whatever is a completely different colour too. Did you have a different setting on the camera ?

 

Just now, 1949threepence said:

Not knowingly, but looking at the control panel, there are numerous different colour shades which can be used on the pic once taken. Also just tried pointing my camera again, and the shading seems to alter automatically with the tilt. Will have to pay careful attention to that problem.   

In my case, colours are a lottery. The camera will do as it pleases. It's about as consistent as autofocus, which again seems to be a random setting. I suspect I'm not the only person with this issue.

[Nick 325]

15 hours ago, Rob said:

In my case, colours are a lottery. The camera will do as it pleases. It's about as consistent as autofocus, which again seems to be a random setting. I suspect I'm not the only person with this issue.

If you use automatic white balance, then the camera will make its own determination of which setting to use.  If you can change it, choose whichever fixed white balance setting gives you the most realistic picture and then stick to that.  Upper tier digital cameras allow you to calibrate the white balance for your exact lighting.

[Rob 2,998]

14 minutes ago, Nick said:

If you use automatic white balance, then the camera will make its own determination of which setting to use.  If you can change it, choose whichever fixed white balance setting gives you the most realistic picture and then stick to that.  Upper tier digital cameras allow you to calibrate the white balance for your exact lighting.

I always reduce the light levels to such that the camera decides it wants to use the flash, therefore the light level should be reasonably consistent. I don't even attempt to take pictures in natural light as they are always under-exposed. At least the current method gives a series of mostly similar exposures, even if every one is different. Best of a bad job, but at least it produces something to work with.

[Peckris 2 2,043]

On 16 November 2018 at 7:35 PM, 1949threepence said:

Whilst it is relatively easy to obtain high grade examples, the trick is to get high grade examples that are good strikes, with as much hair detail as possible, issue free and if at all possible, without ghosting being obvious, especially on pre 1926 examples. It's worth watchiing and waiting for these better examples to come up. Not going to be possible in every case, but I think this 1912 captures most of those qualities, although still a little thin on Britannia's chest, which is another common weak point.  Incidentally, the obverse colour is close to actuality. Not sure why the reverse looks different in the pic.

Here is the conundrum : the stronger the obverse and the better the hair detail, the more likely it is that there will problems with ghosting and weakness on the reverse. It's rare you will get both - the high profile obverse sucked metal from the reverse, which had thin rims and little protection. Ironically the short-lived recessed ear experiment of 1915-16 went a long way to curing the problem, so why it was abandoned... (answers on a postcard).

[1949threepence 3,366]

38 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

Here is the conundrum : the stronger the obverse and the better the hair detail, the more likely it is that there will problems with ghosting and weakness on the reverse. It's rare you will get both - the high profile obverse sucked metal from the reverse, which had thin rims and little protection. Ironically the short-lived recessed ear experiment of 1915-16 went a long way to curing the problem, so why it was abandoned... (answers on a postcard).

You say that and yet the example I posted above has good hair detail and no evidence of ghosting. The obvious question is, therefore, why did ghosting suddenly start, when, ostensibly, the same build of dies were being used? 

The poor hair detail I can understand, but that too seems to go hand in hand with ghosting. 

It's difficult to know why the recessed ear experiment was stopped. We'll never know now, but maybe it had something to do with the war.    

 

Edited November 17, 2018 by 1949threepence

[Paddy 1,540]

On 11/16/2018 at 7:52 PM, PWA 1967 said:

For what its worth Mike 1911,12,13 both F174 ,  F177 &14 you should be able to find quite easily with a good strike.The ones much harder are 1915,16,17,18  & 19 ,these are coins from 1911-1920.

So this one, which is the one I posted in for sale and is currently on Ebay, seems a pretty good strike for the year then?

 

[secret santa 2,013]

On 11/16/2018 at 11:20 PM, Rob said:

It's about as consistent as autofocus, which again seems to be a random setting. I suspect I'm not the only person with this issue.

Interesting, that, as I use autofocus on my Canon digital SLR with macro lens (plus flash) and sometimes the pictures are as sharp as needles and sometimes not !

[PWA 1967 1,840]

Yes Paddy the 1919 is a decent strike 🙂

[1949threepence 3,366]

10 hours ago, Paddy said:

So this one, which is the one I posted in for sale and is currently on Ebay, seems a pretty good strike for the year then?

 

It's a beautiful, crisp strike, Paddy, with only the merest hint of ghosting to the reverse. Slight wear to the highest points reduces the obverse to EF, but a superb specimen, nonetheless. 

[Paddy 1,540]

24 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

It's a beautiful, crisp strike, Paddy, with only the merest hint of ghosting to the reverse. Slight wear to the highest points reduces the obverse to EF, but a superb specimen, nonetheless. 

I am glad it meets with approval! It was a long compare with my existing specimen before I decided which one to keep. It came in with a bunch of mostly rubbish brought to me at the market last week. That is why I love sorting through boxes of random coins - every now and then you find a little gem.

 

[ozjohn 552]

Re the 1919 penny. Although there may be some wear on the King's ear the tip of the mo is fully struck which is something only seen on proofs of coins of this era. A really nice coin. I especially like the black toning rather than the original lustre. 

Edited November 18, 2018 by ozjohn
more info

[VickySilver 775]

Please see coin in PCGS Pop Reports -    203006 under pennies

 

Sad to say this has quite a bit of the original yellow golden colour......

(1926ME for your delight).

[Nick 325]

8 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Please see coin in PCGS Pop Reports -    203006 under pennies