Peckris

It's an "erb".mannnn. If you like Oriental/Asian food you've had some. Please see the following new topic. We magnified and posted two good pics on the post and also provided a link to photobucket with 21 pictures!: 1850 /46 Victoria Shilling Part 2 Follow-Up PICS Follow-Up To First Post--With Pics and/or http://photobucket.com/185046_USBmagnifier I had a good long look at the largest 'blow up' (of the 50). The 5 is indisputably cut over a 4, but the 0 is a puzzle. It seems rather 'heavy' on its left hand side, as if it was compensating for something underlying on that side. That would make more sense if it was a 9, as extra work would be more needed on the left, whereas a 6 would need more work on the right hand side. But that's mere speculation - it doesn't appear at all easy to tell what the underlying digit is. I don't suppose you have a good blow up of a known 1850/49 to compare it with? I sure wish that we could find a known 1850/49 or even an 1850/46 to compare it to! Based on your input, we did compare it to an 18x6 and an 18x9 to compare the 6 and the 9. Our thought (and possibly the graders?) were along the same as yours. What are your thoughts on this: the heavy, ''thick/wider'' left side would indicate an underlying 6 rather than a 9?? When looking at the two numbers on the "control" coins and their shapes, a 6 would go along the entire left side, causing a thicker left side from top to bottom. And a 6 would really not thicken the right side per se, due to its shape and also the bottom of the six is about the same "width/shape" as the bottom of a zero. Whereas the 9 would do basically the opposite: thicker right and partial thickness on left??????? What do you think?? Looking forward to your reply! Thanks!!! Have a look here : http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/webcatalogue/131/L1743r.jpg That shows that the left hand side of the 6 on an 1846 shilling is virtually completely usable as the left hand side of a 0, with no further alteration needed. But the right hand side would need quite a bit of work. I would guess the reverse is true for a 9? The intriguing thing about your close-up shot, is that there appears to be a ghost in the middle of the 0, showing faint lines that correspond not only to the bottom of the loop of a 9, but also the top of the loop of a 6 ! I'd say the jury is still out...

It's an "erb".mannnn. If you like Oriental/Asian food you've had some. Please see the following new topic. We magnified and posted two good pics on the post and also provided a link to photobucket with 21 pictures!: 1850 /46 Victoria Shilling Part 2 Follow-Up PICS Follow-Up To First Post--With Pics and/or http://photobucket.com/185046_USBmagnifier I had a good long look at the largest 'blow up' (of the 50). The 5 is indisputably cut over a 4, but the 0 is a puzzle. It seems rather 'heavy' on its left hand side, as if it was compensating for something underlying on that side. That would make more sense if it was a 9, as extra work would be more needed on the left, whereas a 6 would need more work on the right hand side. But that's mere speculation - it doesn't appear at all easy to tell what the underlying digit is. I don't suppose you have a good blow up of a known 1850/49 to compare it with?

There was a very High Grade Florin posted by palves and was fiound to be fake. There was also a dot underneath the I of BRIT But if the dot was a genuine die flaw, wouldn't that too get reproduced on the fake? Maybe the only coins containing the dots are known fakes, but it would only take one genuine coin with dots, to disprove the theory.

Hi, your penny is the normal issue variety. Not worth very much in that condition, but thank you for posting it - it's always worthwhile checking just in case.

Oh yes, I see it - tiny, right? There appears to be two in fact. There again, it/they could be anything - a minute die flaw for example.

I'm unsure. I can't speak for the florin; the William isn't exactly top grade, but may have been dipped. As for the Anne shilling, mine is even better, but was bought in the 90s before the Chinese invasion. For some reason that particular Anne quite often turns up in virtually UNC condition (and is rated accordingly in ESC and Cope & Rayner.) So they may all be genuine. I can't see any spot beneath the 'i' of brit.

I have emailed him twice. The first time telling him it was a pewter replica. The 2nd time asking him why he hadn't added this to the listing. Reported to ebay who do diddly. I reported it this morning too! He's a 'top' seller with a lot of feedback, bet they ignore it! What really annoyed me about this one was the blatant 'what is it'? You mean he couldn't actually read ELIZABETH on the edge of the coin and, putting two and two together (ie the date), realise it probably isn't Elizabeth II? I've messaged him: "INTERESTING COIN DATED 1562 - WHAT IS IT?" - it's a replica coin, composition uncertain, but the thickness tells me it may be lead or pewter. I used to be a dealer and was taken in by one of these in the early days, and had to refund the sale price to the buyer. Since then I've become expert at spotting them. Yours is almost identical to the item I had. I'd recommend you either withdraw the item and relist it, or amend the description to reflect the fact it's a replica. Hopefully he will take the hint, but don't hold your breath... I'm turning blue already, Peck! We should definately have a dedicated thread for OBVIOUS ebay fakes, which has all members emailing simultanteously! From a specially dedicated ebay account, goes without saying of course! I think the fake-meisters would soon tire of it! I actually got a polite, but rather incoherent reply, to the effect it was too late to change the listing with only 12 hours to go!!!

I have emailed him twice. The first time telling him it was a pewter replica. The 2nd time asking him why he hadn't added this to the listing. Reported to ebay who do diddly. I reported it this morning too! He's a 'top' seller with a lot of feedback, bet they ignore it! What really annoyed me about this one was the blatant 'what is it'? You mean he couldn't actually read ELIZABETH on the edge of the coin and, putting two and two together (ie the date), realise it probably isn't Elizabeth II? I've messaged him: "INTERESTING COIN DATED 1562 - WHAT IS IT?" - it's a replica coin, composition uncertain, but the thickness tells me it may be lead or pewter. I used to be a dealer and was taken in by one of these in the early days, and had to refund the sale price to the buyer. Since then I've become expert at spotting them. Yours is almost identical to the item I had. I'd recommend you either withdraw the item and relist it, or amend the description to reflect the fact it's a replica. Hopefully he will take the hint, but don't hold your breath...

The penny would be one of Peck proofs KP14 through KP20. It's all down to the number of leaves and berries, gunports on the ship, the nature of the K . : , olive branch leaves, waves, etc. Most of those include a bronzed variety, ranging from S to VR. If you don't have access to Peck, I can summarise each KP for you. The farthing looks a little less convincing, but it may just be the photo. If a genuine proof, it would be KF6 through KF10, which have minor differences, mostly the dot on the lowest fold of drapery, and die flaws in the legend.

Always amazes me that such ancient quality coins can be acquired at affordable prices, those are great Hus! Good Romans are plentiful. Not surprising when you consider the size and sophistication of that economy and culture. But yes, it's good that so many are available at such reasonable prices. Ironically, when you look at the late Republic and early Empire, the silver coins are much more affordable than the bronzes.

I'd still love to know how it could happen. The only possibility is having two reverse dies in place, but how that could be done on a one-off basis seems far-fetched?

I guessed as much. But still, you must admit that getting 'pock' and 'wart' into the same sentence is nifty!

I have a 1970 proof penny with two reverses and even under a x20 microscope I cant see any foul play. Have often wondered about getting it authenticated. The "genuine" examples - e.g. 1970 penny - will have been minted at the London Mint when they were on the way to being shut down. I wonder if the supervision was a bit lax if all they were doing was proof sets, and therefore could get away with a bit of 'monkey business'?

That is the big problem with slabbing companies that don't insist on good quality images! CGS are as bad, a lot of their images are just token gestures, totally underexposed and blurred at times, as good as useless. Any 'jasmine' slabbers would surely be trawling the TPGC sites looking for the unidentifiable images and using those slab numbers on their own slabs, wouldn't they? I think slab buyers, and slabbers, should begin insisting on quality images, especially when dealing with milled coinage! I just bought a slabbed coin that looked much better in the hand than the photo had suggested it would. CGS had used very directional lighting that highlighted a surface flaw that 'in the flesh' was almost invisible to the naked eye. On the one had I was glad but on the other hand I know that their pic could be a problem if I come to sell it on. Although to be fair to them, even a bad CGS photo is almost always going to be better than a good ebay photo. I Take it you have'nt seen my photos then? My own opinion but i think my poctures represent my coins 100% accurately warts an all A pocture is a wart?

Nice. Rated only 'S' by ESC but hell, it's a great chance to own a pattern that's affordable!

The penny held up by King Harold at Hastings, when he said "Here, is that a 1033? I can't see it clearly. Let me just hold it up to the ligh..." Or when Nelson said to Hardy, "I bet you this Doriens and Magens shilling that we got them beat by sundown." Or the quarter handed over by Abraham Lincoln to the ticket office ("That'll be 10 cents for a balcony seat for tonight's production, Mr President") But actually, it would have to be any of the pennies laid beneath foundation stones by George V in 1933...

you learning Swahili, scott? That NGC slab is VF max in my book. Even allowing for differences between American and UK "gradining".

What's the reverse? My ESC doesn't give any illustration but does list the reverse of 206 as "Wreath".

Very nice.

It's all in the size of the picture, the presentation, and the description, I feel. Plus maybe the use of the word 'Belsen' in the description, which is a bit naughty as there is no other evidence for it being anything of the kind.

There's no point looking for a proof not dated 1927 - if they exist at all they will be mega rare and you should buy only from a reputable dealer. Otherwise, if it's dated 1927 it's a proof, if not, it's not. You won't see much difference between proof and non-proof wreath crowns, as they were struck in limited quantities to high standard (i.e., the mintages are too low to see die wear.) For some reason, you can see wear on the non-proofs, but this is probably more due to rubbing or keeping in a pocket, rather than genuine circulation. The 1927 crown will have a generally superior rim, and probably more of a mirrored field. Ironically, the 1927 proof is the highest wreath crown mintage.

Photoshop's compression scale runs from 1 (awful) to 12 (virtually uncompressed). Needless to say, the smaller the number, the higher the compression and the smaller the file. In my own experience, if you're displaying on a computer screen - i.e. not printing - you can reduce an existing large picture to 5 on the scale without seeing very much in the way of deterioration. Make sure that you do any Size reduction and PPI reduction and Cropping at the same time, then save. Refuse to pay that sort of money for Photoshop, I use a free program called paint.net which I believe comes from micrsoft, when you save to .jpeg it gives you a sliding scale from 100% down to 0% and shows you the file size as you adjust. It also has many functions of expensive programs such as the ability to work with layers and much more. If anyones interested you can get it here paint.net Actually, Photoshop Elements can do a whole load of stuff, but only costs a fraction of the full Photoshop. About 80% of the program for less than 20% of the cost. Also, Elements is cross-platform, which I suspect paint.net is not. For Mac users, there's Pixelmator, which supports layers and filters and text and a whole lot more, looks gorgeous, and only costs around £20. The GIMP is a nightmare to learn but it's free and open source and just as powerful as Photoshop.

Remember it well. For reasons best known to her, a girl I worked with dumped some in my umbrella. Used to get very strange looks when it rained... Bus stop bus stop, she's there waiting, under my umbrella...

***For Comparing our 1850/46 ...PICS of 1846, 1849, and 1850 "Plain" Dates*** sorry but they are way too small to do anything with. The 1850 pic is 121x48 pixels and just 6kb of data. You have obviously cut the dates out of an existing pic which in its self must have been quite small. To have anything workable then the date pics have to be at least 500 pixels in width. If you are using a camera use the largest pic setting and get it as close to the coin as poss, if you are scanning use the highest resolution setting to obtain the largest pic possible and then cut the dates outs into a seperate pic. In any photo editing software you have an option to save as .jpeg which will tell you the size of the saved file and allow you to compress it to a given data size ie 150kb. If the quality of the pic is reduced too much by the compression then reduce the size of the original pic (usually under "Image" and then "Size" or "Resize"), say the original is 1000x500 pixels then reduce it to 500x250 this way you reduce the data size by half (not quite true but good enough) and then save as .jpeg. Example- The pic of the 1850 shilling from azda above is 1024x1009 pixels and has a file size of 372kb and I bet he has reduced that before posting it. Photoshop's compression scale runs from 1 (awful) to 12 (virtually uncompressed). Needless to say, the smaller the number, the higher the compression and the smaller the file. In my own experience, if you're displaying on a computer screen - i.e. not printing - you can reduce an existing large picture to 5 on the scale without seeing very much in the way of deterioration. Make sure that you do any Size reduction and PPI reduction and Cropping at the same time, then save.

Hello! Thanks for the response, appreciate it. Figured out a way to compress a couple of pictures of the date and posted them a few moments ago. As mentioned in the prior post, we are waiting on a USB magnifier. Once it arrives we will take better pictures of the date and post them. Yes, we also agree with you on Rayner over Spink. Since we are new, is the upload limit per picture or is it an overall per account? Have a great evening! Neither. The limit is per post, irrespective of how many pictures. For each new post the 150k applies again. No limit per account. It's an "erb".mannnn. If you like Oriental/Asian food you've had some. Ahhhhh sooooo, Stuart thinks the 1850 shilling pic i uploaded is Chinese? Very cryptic, but i'd love to hear the theory why..... Stuart may be mistaken... patchouli oil was the hippie fragrance of choice of the 1960s. Now if he'd said MSG or jasmine or lychee or egg foo yung, I could have understood it!