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.

brg5658

Let's See Your Copper Coins, Tokens, Or Medals!

Recommended Posts

I thought this pair was interesting...

If I remember right, Martin Coles Harman was an eccentric (American?) who possibly had bought Lundy Isle or at least owned a good deal of its land - he decided to issue his own currency but again (if I remember right) he was prosecuted by HM Government and told in no uncertain terms that he couldn't. That's a nice pair you have there.

Harman was born in Sussex, so not an American. However, I think your assessment of him having been "eccentric" is probably accurate. He bought ALL of Lundy Isle in 1924, declared himself King, and issued the half puffin and puffin by 1929. Some of these coins did actually see circulation as money on the island, so I would not consider them strictly "fantasy" pieces. Eventually, Harman was prosecuted, but fined a laughably small amount. After his prosecution, the remainder of the coins were withdrawn and remain collector pieces today. The restrike/reissue pieces of 1965 (in both copper and gilt) of the same design are considered truly fantasy pieces.

Being effectively fantasy pieces I'm a little suprised to see them being slabbed.

:rolleyes:

With regard to the "slabbing", I hear the deeply entrenched hatred of plastic on the other side of the pond and it's a little tiring. But, for my collecting interests, 1) I never pay a premium for plastic, and 2) the plastic does offer some additional protection from the elements and mishandling. As I have mentioned before, any collector who systematically and dogmatically avoids slabbed coins will miss out on a lot of high quality items. I buy what I like, and have over the course of the last decade or so developed a very picky taste. If it happens to be in plastic, so be it. The coin is the coin, anything else is a distraction from the hobby.

I have myself bought about half a dozen slabbed coins and I see nothing wrong with them as a form of protecting the contents. I don't think it's slabbing par se that is disliked over here in the UK it's what appears to be the mindless chasing irrespective of the content of the highest numbers, continuous trading up and crossing to try and get a higher number. It makes one wonder if they are coin collectors or just slab collectors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this pair was interesting...

If I remember right, Martin Coles Harman was an eccentric (American?) who possibly had bought Lundy Isle or at least owned a good deal of its land - he decided to issue his own currency but again (if I remember right) he was prosecuted by HM Government and told in no uncertain terms that he couldn't. That's a nice pair you have there.

Harman was born in Sussex, so not an American. However, I think your assessment of him having been "eccentric" is probably accurate. He bought ALL of Lundy Isle in 1924, declared himself King, and issued the half puffin and puffin by 1929. Some of these coins did actually see circulation as money on the island, so I would not consider them strictly "fantasy" pieces. Eventually, Harman was prosecuted, but fined a laughably small amount. After his prosecution, the remainder of the coins were withdrawn and remain collector pieces today. The restrike/reissue pieces of 1965 (in both copper and gilt) of the same design are considered truly fantasy pieces.

Being effectively fantasy pieces I'm a little suprised to see them being slabbed.

:rolleyes:

With regard to the "slabbing", I hear the deeply entrenched hatred of plastic on the other side of the pond and it's a little tiring. But, for my collecting interests, 1) I never pay a premium for plastic, and 2) the plastic does offer some additional protection from the elements and mishandling. As I have mentioned before, any collector who systematically and dogmatically avoids slabbed coins will miss out on a lot of high quality items. I buy what I like, and have over the course of the last decade or so developed a very picky taste. If it happens to be in plastic, so be it. The coin is the coin, anything else is a distraction from the hobby.

I have myself bought about half a dozen slabbed coins and I see nothing wrong with them as a form of protecting the contents. I don't think it's slabbing par se that is disliked over here in the UK it's what appears to be the mindless chasing irrespective of the content of the highest numbers, continuous trading up and crossing to try and get a higher number. It makes one wonder if they are coin collectors or just slab collectors.

I agree with you. The constant bickering of US collectors over such trivial things as "MS66" or "MS65" is annoying in its own right. And, the obsession with collecting numbered slabs is quite prevalent here. I don't partake of those shenanigans. The whole "resubmission" and "crossover" madness is just a huge waste of money. Competitive collecting is bizarre to me -- and often I think these types of collections are just ego-satiating for the hyper-competitive and super-rich. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have participated in another, mainly US, forum with regard to the issue of 'slabbing and grading' as opposed to 'raw'.

My overriding impression is that, for many US collectors, the investment aspect is more important than the collecting aspect. In addition, many people do not have confidence in their own skills and knowledge.

Typical comments include:

"I like to have my Coins Graded. This way You know what Your getting"

"there is little argument that it is almost unheard of for a counterfeit coin to get into a holder (PCGS or NGC) and rarely do they make a mistake"

"Very few retail buyers have the true grading knowledge to buy higher value raw coins"

However, I do think that there is a different culture when it comes to collecting in the USA and I (and others) have noted this when bidding at Heritage. In many cases, condition and grade are as important (more important?) as rarity. I highlighted an auction a couple of weeks ago where a 1887 withdrawn type sixpence - MS 65 I think - sold for $150 which is at least twice the value I would put on it and possible as much as three times what it would fetch at auction in the UK. On the other hand, I bought a lot which included an 1787 sixpence which was 'only' AU 55 for what I thought the sixpence was worth on its own. Both are common coins but the MS 65 commanded a huge premium and one which is, in my view, undeserving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have participated in another, mainly US, forum with regard to the issue of 'slabbing and grading' as opposed to 'raw'.

My overriding impression is that, for many US collectors, the investment aspect is more important than the collecting aspect. In addition, many people do not have confidence in their own skills and knowledge.

Typical comments include:

"I like to have my Coins Graded. This way You know what Your getting"

"there is little argument that it is almost unheard of for a counterfeit coin to get into a holder (PCGS or NGC) and rarely do they make a mistake"

"Very few retail buyers have the true grading knowledge to buy higher value raw coins"

However, I do think that there is a different culture when it comes to collecting in the USA and I (and others) have noted this when bidding at Heritage. In many cases, condition and grade are as important (more important?) as rarity. I highlighted an auction a couple of weeks ago where a 1887 withdrawn type sixpence - MS 65 I think - sold for $150 which is at least twice the value I would put on it and possible as much as three times what it would fetch at auction in the UK. On the other hand, I bought a lot which included an 1787 sixpence which was 'only' AU 55 for what I thought the sixpence was worth on its own. Both are common coins but the MS 65 commanded a huge premium and one which is, in my view, undeserving.

This is a whole philosophical debate that could be discussed ad nauseam. I will just say (in brief) that I think the number of collectors in the USA who collect for "investment reasons" is no more than in the UK and other places. There are a great number of us who collect for a lifetime, and do a great deal of research on the items we acquire.

What I do think is more common in the USA is for a coin in plastic to be constantly sold, bought, sold again, bought again, etc. by speculators and "eBay dealers" -- much of what you see on Heritage and other auction houses are dealers purchasing coins to add to their inventory or to sell at shows. I have bid on several items on Heritage, often times what I think are strong bids -- only to lose the auction, and then see that exact same coin posted on eBay a week later for 3 times (or more) what it sold for at Heritage. These "dealers" are not educated or informed in all areas of numismatics, and because of ignorance they are left to only "buy the slab" and the numbers on the label. Once a nice coin makes it to a serious collector (regardless of the grade on the plastic), the coin will come off of the market and will be enjoyed by the owner for many years.

I have purchased many coins on Heritage at good prices because 1) they were in the "wrong kind" of plastic, 2) they were in a "low grade" like MS63 or MS64, considered by non-specialists to be inferior regardless of rarity, or 3) they were incorrectly described or attributed.

In summary, just because you see coins being sold in venues like Heritage, etc. at crazy prices, that doesn't reflect on the entire USA collector base. It is often more a reflection of the speculators and eBay trolls...which I will agree with you, are more prevalent here in the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey now BRG, please do not give away all my secrets! LOL…As always, just know your coins be it them or the latest sales at DNW that, with online bidding, has also in some cases gone insane. Who is buying at those prices??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll get us back on track with copper here...this isn't a British piece, but is one of my favorite coppers in my collection. The surfaces are amazing, with lovely even tone throughout. It also happens to be 100 years old this year. ;)

1913_Mexico_1Centavo_NGC_GTG_composite_z

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow Brg

That is the best so far. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll get us back on track with copper here...this isn't a British piece, but is one of my favorite coppers in my collection. The surfaces are amazing, with lovely even tone throughout. It also happens to be 100 years old this year. ;)

1913_Mexico_1Centavo_NGC_GTG_composite_z

Yes, that's very nice.

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

Edited by Peckris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

I think this is the one you are referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that was in the other topic of "toned coins" if i remember correctly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

I think this is the one you are referring to.

Beat me to it :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

I think this is the one you are referring to.

That's the one! Thanks Nick (and rpeddie too).

My Lanarkshire token has the same blue iridescence when viewed at the right angle. Sadly, scans miss this with a spectacular Fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

I think this is the one you are referring to.

That's the one! Thanks Nick (and rpeddie too).

My Lanarkshire token has the same blue iridescence when viewed at the right angle. Sadly, scans miss this with a spectacular Fail.

All the more reason to learn how to photograph your coins instead of "scanning" them. ;) Scanning coins is good for documentation/insurance purposes, but doesn't show most coins in their true form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fabulous copper/bronze coins, yet again BRG!

Makes me wonder about collecting coins not for their classification, denomination, date, rarity, etc...but just for the quality & tone alone, whether it be Edward I or George VI, just a pretty wallet full of art!

Actually, I've just looked at all the coins I've kept aside and, in some respects, this is what's naturally happening as I offload coins to release some capital...I'm very happy to say! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fabulous copper/bronze coins, yet again BRG!

Makes me wonder about collecting coins not for their classification, denomination, date, rarity, etc...but just for the quality & tone alone, whether it be Edward I or George VI, just a pretty wallet full of art!

Actually, I've just looked at all the coins I've kept aside and, in some respects, this is what's naturally happening as I offload coins to release some capital...I'm very happy to say! :)

That's sort of what my collection has grown to be. I really just buy what catches my eye. I started about 20 years ago as a series collector of the Lincoln wheat cents, but "plugging holes" grew tiresome. About 5 years ago I started collecting lovely copper (to my eye), and coins with horses on them. That shift opened my eyes to non-USA coins, and I haven't looked back! I enjoy the hobby much more now that it's on my terms, not on the terms of filling some pre-defined slot in an album. :)

Here's another set of coppers that I found quite attractive. It's a copper minors type set from Belgian Congo, 1887-1888. The 10 centimes is the hardest of the bunch to find in nice quality.

belgian_congo_set_obv_complete_zpsf60dba

belgian_congo_set_rev_complete_zps95719b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you delete one of your posts in this thread? I seem to remember you showed us a photo of a token which you'd turned slightly into the light to show off its wonderful prooflike fields, but I've looked back and cannot see it. I only ask, because my Lanarkshire token is the same - turn it slightly into the light, and it has a wonderful bluish prooflike-iness, which scans just can't show.

I think this is the one you are referring to.

That's the one! Thanks Nick (and rpeddie too).

My Lanarkshire token has the same blue iridescence when viewed at the right angle. Sadly, scans miss this with a spectacular Fail.

All the more reason to learn how to photograph your coins instead of "scanning" them. ;) Scanning coins is good for documentation/insurance purposes, but doesn't show most coins in their true form.

The one advantage of scans is that the coin is in the correct plane relative to the 'camera', and in perfect focus. In fact, the only disadvantage - though it's a biggie, as I said above - is the poor tone. Taking photos of my coins is just not an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the more reason to learn how to photograph your coins instead of "scanning" them. ;) Scanning coins is good for documentation/insurance purposes, but doesn't show most coins in their true form.

The one advantage of scans is that the coin is in the correct plane relative to the 'camera', and in perfect focus. In fact, the only disadvantage - though it's a biggie, as I said above - is the poor tone. Taking photos of my coins is just not an option.

When I take images, the coin is perfectly parallel to the camera sensor. And, I shoot with a lens that has a corner to corner flat field. If you decide to tilt the coin to show color, then you can either bump up your f-stop a little to increase depth of field, or you can use focus stacking (of multiple images) to get the full coin in needle sharp focus.

I'd say that scans are massively limited in imaging coins. To say that the "only disadvantage" is that the final product basically doesn't look like the coin in hand is sort of an understatement. I could add to that list that scans 1) don't show luster, 2) they don't show color, 3) they don't show depth/shadows of a relief or incuse design, and 4) they don't optimize the use of the tool (a coin sized object on a very large scanner bed). Even with a $25 lens I can take images of a coin that are superior to a scan at more than 2000dpi, but I can also show all of the things that a scan cannot. So, in my opinion, scans are good for documenting coins, but are pretty bad at taking images for selling a coin or posting on websites. The biggest (and maybe only) advantage of a scanner is that it's easy...the advantages end there. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the more reason to learn how to photograph your coins instead of "scanning" them. ;) Scanning coins is good for documentation/insurance purposes, but doesn't show most coins in their true form.

The one advantage of scans is that the coin is in the correct plane relative to the 'camera', and in perfect focus. In fact, the only disadvantage - though it's a biggie, as I said above - is the poor tone. Taking photos of my coins is just not an option.

When I take images, the coin is perfectly parallel to the camera sensor. And, I shoot with a lens that has a corner to corner flat field. If you decide to tilt the coin to show color, then you can either bump up your f-stop a little to increase depth of field, or you can use focus stacking (of multiple images) to get the full coin in needle sharp focus.

I'd say that scans are massively limited in imaging coins. To say that the "only disadvantage" is that the final product basically doesn't look like the coin in hand is sort of an understatement. I could add to that list that scans 1) don't show luster, 2) they don't show color, 3) they don't show depth/shadows of a relief or incuse design, and 4) they don't optimize the use of the tool (a coin sized object on a very large scanner bed). Even with a $25 lens I can take images of a coin that are superior to a scan at more than 2000dpi, but I can also show all of the things that a scan cannot. So, in my opinion, scans are good for documenting coins, but are pretty bad at taking images for selling a coin or posting on websites. The biggest (and maybe only) advantage of a scanner is that it's easy...the advantages end there. ;)

Nevertheless, scanning is my only option so I'm stuck with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm particularly partial to the tone of this 1868 proof penny in copper:

Penny1868%20F58A%206%20+%20G%20OBV%20500Penny1868%20F58A%206%20+%20G%20REV%20500

That is a BEAUTY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm particularly partial to the tone of this 1868 proof penny in copper:

Penny1868%20F58A%206%20+%20G%20OBV%20500Penny1868%20F58A%206%20+%20G%20REV%20500

Accumulator, great looking coin! I also visited your "website coin cabinet". Holy buckets! AWESOME collection! :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Accumulator, great looking coin! I also visited your "website coin cabinet". Holy buckets! AWESOME collection! :wub:

Yes it is a nice penny, and a great web coin cabinet !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Accumulator, great looking coin! I also visited your "website coin cabinet". Holy buckets! AWESOME collection! :wub:

Yes it is a nice penny, and a great web coin cabinet !!

Thanks guys! :) I've recently picked up a few more pennies which need to be added when time allows.

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

×