Madness' Coin Grading Training Ground

[Madness 146]

My guestimate: gVF

 

 

[Madness 146]

Never mind

Edited September 3, 2018 by Madness

[Rob 2,996]

Could be a bit better than that. The lions' faces are good and there only appears to be wear to one laurel leaf. Not sure what the swirls are on the obverse though - could have been wiped to remove something.

[Madness 146]

Thanks @Rob

My grading was influenced by the lack of detail/flattening in the curls of GIII's hair.  Do you think this is die fill, not coin wear?

[Rob 2,996]

2 minutes ago, Madness said:

Thanks @Rob

My grading was influenced by the lack of detail/flattening in the curls of GIII's hair.  Do you think this is die fill, not coin wear?

It depends on how well it was struck. Seeing things in hand is always easier to make an assessment.

[1949threepence 3,366]

On 9/2/2018 at 11:27 AM, Madness said:

My guestimate: gVF

 

 

I would have said EF/NEF, personally. Nice, issue free coin. 

[Madness 146]

My guestimate: aEF

Generally well struck coin, with the possible exception of portions of segment between 300 degrees and 60 degrees on the reverse, most notably the crowns.  This, though, could be a punching issue rather than a striking issue.  The of rounding of laurel leaves suggest die wear, not coin wear. Older die also suggested by pitting and rounding of lettering.  Flattening of shirt frill suggests coin wear.   Reverse die is of the "no-hearts/serifs-on-7's" variety.  Possibility of pre-strike adjustment marks on reverse.  

 

 

Could @Rob or someone please critique by observations and grading?  Thanks!  Some weird, silicon-like marks at 0 degrees on obverse and garter star on reverse.  Anyone know what these might be?

Edited September 4, 2018 by Madness

[Madness 146]

Note to self: To fully describe locations on a coin face it's necessary to use both circular position in degrees and distance out from the centre or in from the rim.  Sector & segment differentiation and alignment of a figure/letter/number could also be of some use in die analysis.  

Edited September 4, 2018 by Madness

[Rob 2,996]

It's a bit of a curate's egg. The wear, or lack of it to the reverse suggests better than the last coin, with the weakness in the top crowns a striking issue. The 'silicone' could be something deposited in cleaning. The colour makes it a bit difficult to decide, and doesn't help the aesthetics. Given the state of the reverse, you might be right about the obverse die being worn. 

[Peckris 2 2,043]

I'd be happy to give it EF myself.

[Madness 146]

I'm beginning to wonder about the possibility that the reverses of the 1787 sixpences were manufactured differently to the shillings.  The consensus is that the shilling dies were created from fully-formed punches that already had all details in place, including lettering.  I'm observing features of the sixpence reverse that suggest each die was built up from a number of punches with different design elements.  I've noticed the following:

1. Alignment of lettering differs in at least a few examples, but I've not examined this closely yet

2. In some examples the 7's of the date have serifs while others don't

3. The rotational position of the circle in the centre of the garter star varies

In the sixpence pictured above there are details entirely missing at the top of the uppermost two crowns and yet the letters above them are still visible.  This suggests to me that when the die was being created the "crown-punch" (if, in fact, such a thing existed) was struck at a slight angle, resulting in coins with a relatively high relief at the base/corner and details missing at the top/opposite-corner.  I'd need to find a. other examples of this die to confirm, and b. compare the precise position of each of the design elements across as many dies as I can find.  

I'm going to buy this coin.  At 59 GBP the price seems OK.  By way of comparison Michael Gouby has an EF "no-hearts/serif-7" example for 95 GBP.  It would be good to have this coin in my hand and look at it more closely.  In addition, the details in GIII's hair and the Hibernian harp are amongst the best I've seen on a 1787 sixpence so far.  I've decided not to bid on that I/D sixpence being auctioned by DNW, which means I've got some money to spend on examples of other dies.  

Edited September 4, 2018 by Madness

[Madness 146]

Note to self: Die study methodology

It could be helpful to make an attempt at a preliminary grouping of dies for both shillings and sixpences.  This could be accomplished on the obverse by literally joining together the dots, forming a quadrilateral.  By comparing the the side-lengths and angles within the quadrilateral there may be sufficient differences to form "families" of dies, even if not individual dies.   Using a dot would be preferable to a letter in at least one regard, as it is easier to find the centre of a dot than locate a reference point on a letter that might have been disfigured by wear or fill.  

Perhaps it could even be possible to do this by joining together only three dots and measuring angles and lengths of a triangle.  It would certainly be less time consuming as the measurements and mathematics become simpler. 

This method would allow the use of a simple grid system to define positions (as opposed to circular position and distance from centre) and wouldn't require the rotation of images to standardise positions.  The correlation of three/four angles and three/four distances would be sufficient to define the die family.  

Consider the use of a vector based graphics tool for this as opposed to GIMP.  

Once grouped into "families" further differentiation can be made between its members to find individual dies.  

Edited September 5, 2018 by Madness

[Rob 2,996]

In the case of earlier coins, I think an overlay programme is easier because you have no 'standard' grid to work with in the first place. All you have to do is reference it to your chosen standard die (the best struck high grade example you can find) and then look for variations to build the database. If you have an overlaid triangle, you still need to rotate this to the correct position, so you may as well rotate the superimposed coin. That program can be bought off the shelf.

For many hammered coins, a simple line from two opposing points in the legend which passes through an identifiable feature on the bust or other central design feature is often adequate due to the wide variations from die to die.

In the case of later milled coinage, the pointings to teeth are easier to work with once established, as they do not have the same level of variation.

[Madness 146]

Notes to Self

Hypothesis 1 - If a coin has evidence of circulation wear and is "lustrous" it will have been dipped

Hypothesis 2 - If a coin is identified as a scarce variant shortly after being released for circulation it will be quickly absorbed from circulation by collectors.

Hypothesis 3 - If a coin is withdrawn from circulation by collectors shortly after being released for circulation it will be less likely to show wear than one that continued to circulate.

Hypothesis 4 - Coins with scarce variations that require magnification to identify will be more likely to continue to circulate than scarce variants identifiable by the naked eye.  It follows that, in general, the condition of the former will be inferior to that of the latter. 

Hypothesis 5 - Coins that were withdrawn from circulation by a collector are more likely to be extant than those that were not.  It follows that coins with scarce variations identifiable by the naked eye will be over-represented and skew any attempt to estimate or determine the number of coins produced by a particular die.  It is likely that coins with scarce variations identifiable under magnification will be somewhat over-represented and influence any attempted to estimate or determine the number of coins produced by a particular die.  

 

[Rob 2,996]

Agree with all of those.

Good examples are no.2 the undated 20p mule and no.5 the H & KN pennies, which these days are probably as common as the 'common' types in low grade - everybody kept them..

[Peckris 2 2,043]

19 hours ago, Madness said:

Notes to Self

Hypothesis 1 - If a coin has evidence of circulation wear and is "lustrous" it will have been dipped

As long as it isn't a weak strike. Do be aware that a coin that has been over-dipped will NOT be lustrous but will be pale, look cleaned, yet have something of a dull appearance.

Hypothesis 2 - If a coin is identified as a scarce variant shortly after being released for circulation it will be quickly absorbed from circulation by collectors.

Hypothesis 3 - If a coin is withdrawn from circulation by collectors shortly after being released for circulation it will be less likely to show wear than one that continued to circulate.

True.

Hypothesis 4 - Coins with scarce variations that require magnification to identify will be more likely to continue to circulate than scarce variants identifiable by the naked eye.  It follows that, in general, the condition of the former will be inferior to that of the latter. 

Also true. Hence the general awareness of rare dates and die marks such as H and KN compared to the very scarce but hard to spot bun penny varieties (for example).

Hypothesis 5 - Coins that were withdrawn from circulation by a collector are more likely to be extant than those that were not.  It follows that coins with scarce variations identifiable by the naked eye will be over-represented and skew any attempt to estimate or determine the number of coins produced by a particular die.  It is likely that coins with scarce variations identifiable under magnification will be somewhat over-represented and influence any attempted to estimate or determine the number of coins produced by a particular die.  

Yes. However price guides are extremely slow to reflect this. It has taken literally decades for the process of reality in relation to what was scarce from circulation before D Day in 1971 to even begin to be adjusted following the Big Melt. A couple of examples : 1946 halfpennies and 1958 sixpences were first classed as 'very scarce in Unc' in the late 60s, and now at long last they are recognised as nothing of the sort.

 

 

[Madness 146]

@Peckris 2

Do you have any images of an over-dipped coin so that I can see an example of their appearance (dull & pale)?  Thanks!  Does this apply to all metals/alloys, or just silver?

Edited September 11, 2018 by Madness

[Peckris 2 2,043]

17 hours ago, Madness said:

@Peckris 2

Do you have any images of an over-dipped coin so that I can see an example of their appearance (dull & pale)?  Thanks!  Does this apply to all metals/alloys, or just silver?

I learned the hard way! and haven't kept any definite examples. I don't know if this coin from Google Images HAS been dipped, but often a coin that has been dipped too much will look rather like this:

... and yes, I'm talking about silver. Dip won't work on any other metal (it's why it's called "silver dip"!)

[Madness 146]

Thank you!

[Madness 146]

Hypothesis 6 - Once new varieties are discovered and brought to the public's attention collectors and sellers will examine their coins for these varieties and themselves make the existence of these specimens known publicly.  It follows that this will effect the results of a die study and any attempt to determine the number of coins struck from particular dies.  

Since revealing the existence of the Hearts/7-String/Serif-7 variety of the 1787 sixpence on this forum two more have been listed for sale on eBay.  I guess this could be a coincidence, but the population of this coin has immediately grown by 200% from 1 to 3!  Hmm.  Is this a good thing or a bad thing for a die study?  If a mathematical model could be developed such occurences could be accounted for.  

Speculation - I wonder if it would be possible to building into a statisical analysis the effect of variants on the use of a particular die.  If a die has a scarce variation it will have relatively high survival rate of coins.  The run-of-the-mill dies will produce coins that are circulated into oblivion.  The concept of "scarce" itself is also then called into question.  Dies with insignificant variations may well become scarcer than those with obvious variations and be more difficult for the completionist to find in a high grade.  Oh, a die study is a tricky thing!  I wish I knew more about the mathematics of probability!  Actually, I need to refine that statement.  I wish I knew anything about the mathematics of probability!  OK, OK.  You've caught me out.  I wish I knew anything about mathematics!  

Edited September 11, 2018 by Madness

[Madness 146]

I don't know if there's such a thing as an undergrad degree in numismatics, but if there were it should probably include subjects drawn from the following disciplines:

• Social history
• Economic history
• Archaeology
• Probability/statistics
• Graphical/imaging information technology
• Curation/conservation
• Materials science
• Historical survey of mechanical engineering
• At least one non-native language 
• A practical subject in the art and craft of coin-making, including experimental archaeology

The trouble with such a course is that it would only have niche appeal and little application to a career outside of academia.  

If only such a degree existed in Australia 25 years ago!  Many of my areas of interest seem to intersect in numismatics.  My year twelve subjects consisted of Modern History, Mathematics (calculus and functions), German, Physics, English and Music.  I guess these are roughly equivalent to A levels in the UK.  I took a year of Classical Greek and two years of Koine.  I gained entry into an honours degree in engineering, but deferred, never to return.  I began a masters in library and information management, again deferring after only one semester. 

I'm certainly not trying to build myself up here by reciting this sad history of not seeing things through.  Rather, I'm analysing the particulars of why I'm drawn into this strangely appealing hobby.   Perhaps others were sucked in for similar reasons.  Anyone?

 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Madness

[declanwmagee 122]

On 9/11/2018 at 4:40 AM, Madness said:

@Peckris 2

Do you have any images of an over-dipped coin so that I can see an example of their appearance (dull & pale)?  Thanks!  Does this apply to all metals/alloys, or just silver?

[Madness 146]

My guestimate: gEF

I was almost going to give this an aPAS, if it weren't for the lack of detail in the two curls as circled in the lower image.  Mind you, I can't remember having seen any detail yet in either of these curls with the exception of the September proof, which was double struck.  Given the seeming ubiquity of the lack of detail here in the circulation coins, I'm not sure whether it's the product of coin wear, die wear or the result of something else in the minting process (such as slightly too little pressure applied by the press).  The fields seem relatively clean, although there are a couple of hairline scratches on the reverse. 

The obverse has less of the pitting that plagues many (I'm a little hesitant to use the word "most" at this stage) of the circulation 1787 sixpences.  There is a small die crack at about 5 o'clock.

Please critique my grading and comments.

 

 

[Peckris 2 2,043]

6 hours ago, Madness said:

My guestimate: gEF

I was almost going to give this an aPAS, if it weren't for the lack of detail in the two curls as circled in the lower image.  Mind you, I can't remember having seen any detail yet in either of these curls with the exception of the September proof, which was double struck.  Given the seeming ubiquity of the lack of detail here in the circulation coins, I'm not sure whether it's the product of coin wear, die wear or the result of something else in the minting process (such as slightly too little pressure applied by the press).  The fields seem relatively clean, although there are a couple of hairline scratches on the reverse. 

The obverse has less of the pitting that plagues many (I'm a little hesitant to use the word "most" at this stage) of the circulation 1787 sixpences.  There is a small die crack at about 5 o'clock.

Please critique my grading and comments.

I personally would rate the reverse GEF, but would stop at EF for the obverse, as there are numerous instances of slight wear - the ribbon, the nose/lips/chin, tips of leaves, bottom of drapery, etc.

[Madness 146]

Thanks Chris!  I have a long way to go.