Peckris

It would be marked down on the obverse, true - weakly struck should command a lower price than well struck. It's also true that that particular series can see obverses nearly a grade lower than the reverse. But also don't forget that that picture is about 4 times life size, which always exaggerates flaws.

the reverse looks really good, if i bought the coin though on the strength of that 1 pic, i would be sending it back bu....no way.....gvf/ef for me The reverse is clearly UNC - point to a single item of wear? The obverse is ambiguous : the flattened areas could be down to the poor strikes of that series. If you look elsewhere on the obverse there's no sign of any wear - legend, rim, eyebrow, etc. The part I don't like is the top of the ear, but that has been known to be weakly struck especially between 1914 and 1919. As for the discolouration of the "flattened" areas, yes that's a bit tricky, but if you examine it, you will see the same colour right behind the head, where there can't be any wear yet. I'd say the jury's out on the obverse.

Stop prevaricating oh green one and scan away, I would like to read them also Mañana

I don't even own any. I only ever needed them once and I got the coin weighed at the Midland instead.

I could, but the issue is the sheer amount of work involved. The publication started in 1967 in November, and ran monthly at least until Feb 1992, with a period of 6 months when they issued twice per month. When you put that together its around 25 years of monthly issues. In the early days and in the later years, the page count was around 80, but when at its best, it ran to around 140 pages or so, maybe overall an average of 100 pages. Conservatively that means 25x12x100 = 30,000 scans, although I guess it might be half of that if pages were scanned in twos. Then there is all the cropping and aligning, plus design of the 'package' for the whole thing. My best guess is that its around 6 months work if performed on a continuous basis. To then have somebody come along and say 'you can't do that, take it down from a web site' would make all that work a complete waste, so for this reason, I'm not interested unless I can be reasured that there will be no comebacks. 1966. I've offered to scan the Ron Stafford article from 1979 (the big florin survey) but there haven't been any takers so far. It would only be around 8 scans but I'm not going to do it unless there is some interest. I'm interested. All of the articles I've seen so far have been great references, even if they aren't directly relevant to my collecting. Then I'll do it! Before long...

I could, but the issue is the sheer amount of work involved. The publication started in 1967 in November, and ran monthly at least until Feb 1992, with a period of 6 months when they issued twice per month. When you put that together its around 25 years of monthly issues. In the early days and in the later years, the page count was around 80, but when at its best, it ran to around 140 pages or so, maybe overall an average of 100 pages. Conservatively that means 25x12x100 = 30,000 scans, although I guess it might be half of that if pages were scanned in twos. Then there is all the cropping and aligning, plus design of the 'package' for the whole thing. My best guess is that its around 6 months work if performed on a continuous basis. To then have somebody come along and say 'you can't do that, take it down from a web site' would make all that work a complete waste, so for this reason, I'm not interested unless I can be reasured that there will be no comebacks. 1966. I've offered to scan the Ron Stafford article from 1979 (the big florin survey) but there haven't been any takers so far. It would only be around 8 scans but I'm not going to do it unless there is some interest.

The first item is less than Fine, in fact Fair/N Fine would be nearer the mark. The second item is pretty close. The reverse doesn't look to have seen any circulation, while the apparent hair flattening on the obverse could easily be explained by the weak strikes so commonly encountered in that series. I'll give him 5/10.

The difference there being, that there are a lot - 750,000? - of 1970 proofs, more than enough to satisfy all collectors I would imagine.

Thanks! As i said, this is a project in infancy, so copyright is not really an issue yet, publishing is a remote goal. I'm slowly working through scanning my entire collection, which although a "labour of love" can get pretty tedious, so I do it in small chunks. And I'm also now realising just how crap some of my coins really are ; but this is the purpose for now, to have a record of just what I have on my computer, and eventually iPad so when looking a stuff on Ebay etc, I can decide whether to add a new coin or upgrade a existing one. Including copies of rare dies i don't currently possess allows me to help decide if what I think I'm bidding on is! Having known examples of both the 1903 and 1863 open 3s for direct comparison on screen has already paid dividends! Watch this space! David It sounds like your objectives are exactly the same as mine and it would be interesting to see the result. I do find that the ability to view my collection remotely is really useful. This is especially true when I want to bid or buy something and I'm not at home. Looking forward to seeing your pennies! You can actually upload your collection here. Don't forget there are member galleries, though I don't know how many people use them.

Because for all intents and purposes, that's the only grade that matters for proofs. By far most proofs are FDC; a small number will be slightly impaired and dealers & auctioneers will mark those down (no need to have a separate column in the guides). Circulated worn proofs will be so rare and yet simultaneously so undesirable, it wouldn't be worthwhile to list them. And don't forget, there will be many many proofs where there are also business strikes - for those, you wouldn't even be able to confidently say that what you have is a proof anyway, if it's circulated for long.

That just takes me to the home page. Do you have a URL to that particular item, or at least, sale? Just posting. http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=340&lotNo=15206 Thanks Josie :-) Shame there's no images, but that is the set, for sure.

That just takes me to the home page. Do you have a URL to that particular item, or at least, sale?

Argus Books was apparently the publisher of the 1992 Year Book whereas the 1988 was published by Numismatic Publishing I think you mean Coin Monthly not Coin News, but yes, that sounds like a reasonable case. After all, people can currently buy the Coin News YEARBOOK without buying a single issue of Coin News.

In fact, the bi-monthly experiment (when it was just called "COIN") only lasted a few months, which is kind of odd when you think May 1980 was when the crazy prices were at their height and the Bunker Hunt cornering of silver was going on. This was the response of the editor of Coin News when I approached him for information re. writing a Wikipedia entry on coin periodicals and annuals : "Further to your enquiries I can confirm that the current COIN YEARBOOK is in no way connected to Coin Monthly – we started the COIN NEWS YEARBOOK in 1994 and dropped the word NEWS and adopted the blue pages in 1997 – after the demise of COIN MONTHLY and the other YEARBOOK. We have never been connected to COIN MONTHLY although were approached with a view to us purchasing the title, we declined." This seems to imply that Coin Monthly ceased between 1994 and 1997?

Not forgetting I hope, that scans are also crap - great for detail but absolutely appalling for tone, lustre, or general eye appeal. If you judge your own coins from a scan, you will feel a big let-down.

The scratch is very light and not visible to the naked eye and only just visible using a magnifier. The camera however picks it up easily. £90 for yours is dead cheap. Did you see my hypothesis Nick? Makes perfect sense I believe.

The threepence has always been one of the highest rated 1927 proofs - the reasons for that maybe lost in the mists of time. However, it MAY be to do with the fact that it and the florin are the only issues of those denominations dated 1927. Admittedly the currency 1927 halfcrown and sixpence are earlier TYPES, but that may not have signified so much in days gone by. Thanks for that. Wow, £1100 for the 1927 sets in their horrible cardboard cases? I'll look after mine! No I wouldn't pay £200 for a VF 1797 2d, but I suspect that Spink's VF would look closer to our idea of EF tbh. I certainly think a genuinely VF specimen is worth at least £100, though GF examples with the usual edge damage ought to be available for around £25 as there's lots and lots of those.

Uh? So what's that doing for the value of a 1927 proof set? Over £500 now?

I wonder if it's because the rims are proportionately larger on the small denominations? Therefore would protect the lustre better and for longer.

Picture?

Pfft, isn't it obvious? The last two digits of the year, when added together, equals the first digit. Cause for rejoicing and celebration.

Ferro Di-sulphate? (Just a guess - I did get my Chemistry O Level but that's as far as it went apart from producing bright purple dyes at home from potassium permanganate ) It might be if this compound existed, but it doesn't, at least not in a stable condition. The other Iron Sulphate is Ferric Sulphate, which is hydrated Fe2(SO4)3 and is an orange crstalline salt. Ok. I'll take your word for it - my chem is very very rusty indeed. Though if it was better I could cure that rust...

Ten sticks of dynamite hanging on a wall Ten sticks of dynamite hanging on a wall And if one stick of dynamite should accidentally fall There'd be no sticks of dynamite and no bleedin' wall (Thrown out of Scout Camp, our Liverpool troop was, for singing that round the campfire).

Nor me, just the 2010, but did get a super 2010 Florence Nightingale in my change today, 1st one I've seen David I'd have preferred a nice Katy Perry or Beyonce in my change, Florence is getting a bit old and wrinkly now for my taste. Phew, for a moment there, I thought you said Katie Price! Did you see Jasper Carrott last night?

Your 1924 is almost identical to mine (we both have gems!) - I don't see any difference compared to mine. All that series 1920 - 1925 look very silvery when BU unlike the larger silver denominations. The only discolouration I have is to my 1923 which although BU has a yellowish/gold colour rather than silver-white.