Peckris

It's not the cookies, it's the forum software. I belong to another one which uses the same software - if you quote a post then back out without posting, the next post you make puts the same quote in and there's no way to get rid of it, except to delete its contents. Mildly infuriating.

No need to dream. The vast majority of Roman coins found in this country are mid-to-late Empire bronze, exceedingly common and with average wear, worth very little especially if 'burial green'.

Looks to me like one of the contemporary copper forgeries.

Agreed, never seen one.

All the ones I've seen haven't shown any difference, e.g. all of one kind being in a particular colour case.

I think I can honestly say I've never been scared by a coin, except when I dropped my EF+ 1797 2d on the floor, but luckily the edge was undamaged.

Ah yes - a bridge camera in DSLR style. You should be able to find the right size Raynox close-up lens for the filter thread on that, but you might find that a good stand, proper lighting, and the macro mode, will serve you just as well, and save you money.

That's fairly astonishing - Bugger Bognor looks the same age as his dad.

I thought they'd had a facility to mint them AT the Festival, but actually that would be rather unlikely, given the security issues etc. No, it transpires they were minted in order to be sold as souvenirs at the Festival. Presumably all the ones with card cases are such souvenirs. I don't know what the significance of burgundy vs green cases was.

Just to answer the other part of your question - yes, it was also his own price guide when first issued in the early 1980s. Obviously, the prices listed are well out of date now, but they will indicate an approximate guide to relative rarities. Factor in though, that fewer people were interested in the minutiae of varieties back then, so if he's listed something at 4 or 5 times the value of the regular issue, it's probably rarer than you would think.

I didn't even know Praktica were still around in the digital era! It seems I was wrong to assume yours was one of their venerable SLRs. In which case, stick with Macro Mode, or perhaps invest in a screw-in add-on closeup lens. Raynox won't cost you an arm and a leg, but do get the one that's the right size for your filter thread size.

The London Mint (I'm sure) closed down long before 1987.

Ah, you're talking about 'Macro mode' on an ordinary lens (most cameras will have this, which let you get closer to your subject than the normal minimum focus distance). I was actually talking about a specialised macro lens which takes pictures at 1:1 (in other words the size of the object on the negative / sensor) is the same size as in real life, allowing super-enlargements. Your Praktica, being an SLR, will allow interchangeable lenses, but macro lenses aren't cheap! The other alternative is to raise your camera on a stand (a tripod wouldn't work) that allows it to point down, then use lighting from two different angles to bring out the relief on the design. The greater distance allows for a) being outside minimum focus distance and b) not casting shadows from the equipment onto the coin.

I'd like to know which coin that was? My understanding (which may be wrong ... I was once ) is that the London Mint finished off the pre-decimal issues, then turned their attention to proofs and commemoratives, whereas the Llantrisant Mint did all the decimal issues, of which there was a vast number. I'm not sure when the London Mint finished business, but it may have been the mid-70s? Not sure.

It might be worth pointing out that the 'finish' on decimal coins between 1968 and the 80s, is almost worth a discussion paper on its own. For example, the majority of 1968 coins have a 'satin' finish, whereas in 1969 there are quite a few with 'mirror' type finish. As you go through the 70s, the proportion of mirror to satin increases sharply, almost in line with the mirror proofs that suddenly flood the market from the mid-70s. It's actually hard to find any pre-decimal coins with a mirror finish, apart from certain noted exceptions such as the New York 1960 crowns, some 1961 halfcrowns (and there are other dates and other denominations through the 50s and 60s, which are unreported) which are described as 'polished blanks'. I do not believe this is metal impurity, but a deliberate trial of different finishes by the Royal Mint, perhaps to see how circulation affects each type?

That's really not too bad at all. It would perhaps benefit from a bit of time spent in Photoshop or similar, to make adjustments to Levels, Definition, Sharpness, but apart from the slight lack of contrast it's really not bad. As for a macro lens, what you've mentioned is a zoom lens. A purpose-made macro lens would be a fixed focal length, e.g. 85mm, or 100mm perhaps, and would go onto your camera after you detach the existing lens. You would need good lighting, as you want to avoid flash, or alternatively use daylight.

:'(

Perhaps worth pointing out that the majority of pre-1920 halfcrowns turn up in that condition? (Average is GF - GVF). This is because so many were put aside when the silver content was reduced to 50% in 1920.

My guess is that this is a child, possibly age around 12? (The clothing and fashions of the era, and the ageing effect of Victorian urban conditions, made kids look quite a lot older than a child of equivalent age today). "god knows what she is wearing it looks like parts of tree limbs" I think she's leaning over the back of a cane chair?

Me too, but sadly my collection doesn't survive until the next day...

If the detail is there, and the green is even, and there's no corrosion (big "ifs") - then I would say Yes, but only at a very large discount over the regular sort.

You do realise that even if only 1% of the total mintage is one of those varieties, that's still 5m pennies?

Such "buried" pennies can have good detail, but often quite a lot of corrosion too. Your examples are VF for detail, but sadly have suffered quite a degree of damage. However, it is certainly worth checking them for rare varieties, of which there are more than a few in 1862 and 1863. If you can find a copy of Freeman's "The Bronze Coinage of Britain" you will find all the information you need, or even more from Michael Gouby's book.

It would be instructive to know the difference between how blanks and dies are prepared for both proofs and specimen coins. The lines of demarcation may not be clear cut anyway - is the 1951 Crown a proof, or "prooflike"? I suspect the latter, as many were struck at the Festival of Britain. Then there are the "New York" strikes of the 1960 Crown - these may well be classed as 'specimens', as they certainly don't conform to the definition of proofs,

"Proof like" is a rather lazy and unscientific term (compare with "BU Gem"!). It is of course entirely possible that proof dies are used for currency strikes as well, but obviously the blanks have not been specially prepared as for a proof, so at best they are only going to seem "semi proofs". Also, the learning curve involves distinguishing between "prooflike" where proof dies were used, and "prooflike" as a lazy description applied to an early strike from a currency die.