Peckris

Upload the picture from your computer when you get home.

Ouch.

Scuse my ignorance, but who is Jgw3D?

Yes, absolutely. (By the way - trivial point - I note that the Chinese Coins forum opens up a new tab when you click a link, unlike this one which takes you away from here, so you have to Go Back through however many levels it took you away, in order to return here. Chris, any chance we could have the same here : i.e., when you click an embedded link, it opens a new tab?)

Yes, welcome! We're a friendly lot, and (mostly) don't bite.

No problem. Just to give you an idea of what the genuine article looks like (Charles II crown):

Agreed, but that's the absolute resolution. 600 dpi is a relative resolution. So yes, if you start with an image 4500 x 3000 pixels, you can crop it quite a bit, irrespective of the dpi.

There is a VERY clear ghost of a 2 behind the 1 !!!! Yes, I thought that too.

Those are crude replicas, age uncertain, of Charles II silver. The first picture looks copper, but it could just be bad photography if the background is the same as the second one. Either way, everything about them screams "wrong". Scrap value only I'm afraid.

Nothing wrong with the equipment there. I suspect it's your light source. If "natural", is the camera casting a shadow?

Who's this "our", Jock?

To check it out you will need better images than a phone. Try getting something in the order of 600dpi and use a hosting site such as photobucket and a link. 600 dpi is a complete waste of time on a computer monitor that won't display more than approx 100 at best.

Nice bit of golden tone - you can't beat it

God yeah - there's few fouler oil smells than gearbox oil.

It's not highest quality image to start with, but here is a blow up of the date: The upper portion of the 7 could easily have been the top of a 5 too.

Especially when you consider the minutiae they use to reject coins for slabbing, after giving them the ultimate thorough going over. "Oh wait guys, I'm wearing my LC hat today, not my CGS hat. They are different sizes, you know."

Sad day I remember walking on the wild side (well, perhaps not as much as Holly from Miami FLA ) in 1973. Also how much of an impact the Transformer album had - before that, we thought Bowie was a maverick, a one-off, then along came Lou.... Bowie Produced the transformer album. He died in Southampton of all placesBowie's dead???

EAR muffs? Oops no, I was thinking of Linda Lovelace...

Both 7s point to a tooth, unless my eyesight is WAY out. And don't ignore that dink in the edge right next to it.

Oh, B'Jesus, they come in varieties and die-pairs?Edit: Oh, Gary, no, not you AND Peck? I just don't see what purpose they serve overseas (or here, for that matter), why would somebody want a fantasy piece, when they can get something genuine?Is it a gift for relatives scenario abroad, on account of "what else do you buy them", or is it ignorance to the fact that 'genuine' coins are still in existence? I find it odd! Even stranger than the immeasurable "thunk" that is the coin collector! Well there are several factors here: 1. It's an attractive piece in anyone's language, so worth having 2. There's no 'original' as such, it's a kind of 'fantasy mule' if you can get your head round that 3. The closest thing to it is an 'original pattern', which in that condition would cost hundreds if not into 4 figures. 4. It uses Kuchler's actual obverse, and apart from the raised cartwheel rim, a very close approximation to an actual pattern reverse. So there! It's the only fantasy piece I own, and I'd sooner have it than the ridiculous 1933 fantasy penny (I would rather have a 'genuine fake'!!)

Sad day I remember walking on the wild side (well, perhaps not as much as Holly from Miami FLA ) in 1973. Also how much of an impact the Transformer album had - before that, we thought Bowie was a maverick, a one-off, then along came Lou....

Yes, it's a modern Mint-produced fantasy piece reproducing an actual obverse of Geo III and a pattern penny reverse closely resembling that in Peck 1084. However, I think it's one of the better ones, and the 'darkened proof' appearance is attractive. I got one from eBay for £10 which I considered was worth the outlay.

Don't you mean Royal Mail plc (sold-to-the-highest-bidder)? Last I heard, the Mint had nothing to do with the postal service! There again, both services produce tacky commemoratives for profit, make frequent errors, and ain't wot they used to be, so an understandable mistake.

"Consignment" is total submission per auction. Presumably your two coins would have been fine with others making weight? Yes, I would say so...but that's a remarkably privileged position they find themselves in, that they can turn their nose up at a grand's worth of coins or, putting it a different way, around £300 of profit (buyers & sellers prem.) from handling 2 coins! I was genuinely surprised! Yes, I agree. Unless their clientele is mainly oil sheikhs and Russian oligarchs with $$$ to burn, I can't see how their position is strengthened by refusing perfectly good lots.

Im confused now. The reason i use capsules is because they give more protection than 2x2 flips. In 2x2s coins are protected only by very thin plastic layer. My main concern is coin rubbing capsule walls. Even if capsule is only 1mm bigger, coin still have some play inside. Will plasctic rub/wear/mark a coin? Flips aren't "very thin plastic" - they are robust enough to protect a coin's surface from anything except sharp sudden violent attacks with a metal implement. iHowever,f you insist on capsules, don't get ones you have to force the coin into - that will cause more damage. As for 'looseness' damage, that won't occur if 1) you don't shake the capsule and 2) you put some protection such as felt into the bottom of the capsule.