Peckris

I would definitely say - as a recent owner - that Davies is the defining work from 1816. You can ignore the prices but still use them to judge relative rarity. Dave Groom's book is very good for the 20th Century, but you'd have a big gap before that. ESC is best for early milled - from 1816 it is completely superseded. If your period is 1816 - 1936 then I'd start with Davies. And add Groom for 1902 to 1936. You need not really bother with ESC after 1816 if you have the others. Rotographic is pretty good for prices. Spink isn't bad but a bit optimistic for certain modern issues (a better guide to prices is their Numismatic Circular but what's in there is only a tiny selection). Tony Clayton is out of date, isn't he? The Coin Yearbook is absolutely hopeless for varieties, but not too bad on prices. BCMV I've always found is very unrealistically low on prices, even more in the eBay era - but it's a few years since I've seen a copy (it's also hopeless for varieties). You pays your money ... (All guides are just that - a guide to prices, an average.)

Which is still not BU as the seller is stating, even if i'm being harsh at EF,we could go AUNC and its still not BU, so again, i rest My case that its not BU If you'd originally said "AUNC" instead of "EF" I would never have bothered to argue the point. There's a big big difference.

It's S456 - a Julius Caesar denarius, elephant obverse, and reverse priestly emblems. Spinks also give a RRC number 443/1. This refers to Crawford's Roman Republican Coinage. The value in F would be between £75 and £100. Here's mine (different design):

This is sometimes true, but it doesn't necessarily follow. Proofs are done on polished specially prepared blanks, double struck, using dies that have been similarly polished. Many such dies are then used for business strikes. If impaired, there would be no way to distinguish them, unless the "proof" still has a razor sharp rim edge, but even this cannot be ruled as conclusive. Remember a proof is not a separate design or issue as such, it is a method or standard of striking which may use exactly the same dies as the normal issues.

All editions are an improvement on the previous ones and 1992 is the last printed, but anything in the 1971 would still be valid. Alan Rayner died a few years ago, so there will be no 6th edition. Like all reference material, it has omissions and many rarity values are demonstrably incorrect, but it is still a valuable addition to the library, listing as it does a reasonably comprehensive summary of the milled silver coins. It doesn't go into as much detail as Davies, but covers a longer period. Thank you Rob. I just got this http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/310369811829?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 £7 isnt a lot for educational paperwork. Must go look up Davies. Doh ! duh ! was I blonde the last time you saw me. That's actually the 1974 edition - same as the one I've got. It's a useful book especially for the early milled series (Davies is better from 1816), and is virtually the defining work for pre-19th Century milled silver. Though as Rob says, such books are always going out of date - however it's a great learning tool, and the rarities it lists are all genuinely rare even though more have been discovered since.

PUBLIC STATEMENT : "The attached link is to a pdf that contains scans of two Coin Monthly articles by Ron Stafford, from the issues of that periodical dated FEBRUARY 1979, and 28 DEC-10 JAN 1980. I hereby acknowledge the intellectual ownership in these articles of Ron Stafford, and the publication copyright which at the time was held by The Numismatic Publishing Company, Essex which has since ceased to exist. The scans were done and the uploads made, purely for the interest of members of the predecimal.com forum. This material must not be copied except for the private use of said members, nor may it be used by anyone for commercial purposes, or disseminated any more widely than the predecimal.com website. Efforts have been made to trace the current copyright owners of this material but these have been unsuccessful. If the current copyright owners make representations that this scanned upload is a breach of copyright, the uploaded file will be taken down without delay or prejudice." http://www.mediafire.com/file/k0ckgf6tybktc39/Ron Stafford florins survey.pdf Note : the first long article contains a survey of 20,000 florins made by Ron Stafford during 1978, and the second short article is a follow-up survey in 1979.

Do you have any photos Garry? Are you getting frisky with me !, I like it , erm no I don't. I could do later but I can't gaurantee the quality. Coins that are buried for years and years often acquire this slightly glossy all-over green patina. It's very much like verdigris but isn't an 'attack' as such, as the green coating is very very hard and won't cause further damage to the coin. For the record, I found quite a few George V pennies (WW1 period) in this state in the late 60s - most of them in what would have been very high grade (still enough detail to show that quite clearly). It may be something unique to bronze?

You rest your case, marked "I had this as EF", where exactly? LOL

........me neither ...... what a beaut that coin fair is eh? I miss it - nothing like it in the SW

modern photography eh i took some pics of my 1924 tanner for another thread here, the pic of the reverse looked stunning, the obverse less so, i didnt post the pics becsause of the way the obverse photographed. i dont think the difference between the 2 pics was as different as the coin in this thread, true to say in the hand my coin is okay. but my tanner is gef. Its true to say that the pics are 4 times life size.......but thats true for both the reverse and the obverse pics. Peckris is right in my opinion the reverse is a good grade higher than the obverse, is this coin, despite the obverse, and what the camera may have done to it.....BU...????? Probably not. It might qualify as a GEF/UNC but deffo not BU

and can look forward to your wife ME spending it Watch out Garry - she's reading this over your shoulder she's behind me asleep so i'm safe for now How long you been married Garry? Women never sleep! Their eyes may close but don't be fooled...

Stop prevaricating oh green one and scan away, I would like to read them also Mañana look up ! no thanks pigeons do things in your eyes, but yeah tomorrow is another day. To the Latins, it's always "tomorrow", especially if the missus needs a job doing my wife has italian blood so I am buggered, she likes a fight and i like peace. Garden or mushy? (© The Two Ronnies, 1975)

and can look forward to your wife ME spending it Watch out Garry - she's reading this over your shoulder

Stop prevaricating oh green one and scan away, I would like to read them also Mañana look up ! no thanks pigeons do things in your eyes, but yeah tomorrow is another day. To the Latins, it's always "tomorrow", especially if the missus needs a job doing

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.