Peckris

Now this one is interesting. I'm pretty sure the I of BRITT is to a space (I drew a helpful arrow!!). But, it 'feels' different to my other 1911s. 1. The legend looks a little bigger in relation to the flan and portrait 2. The bust looks slightly different, in that the face in profile looks a bit wider than the regular issue 3. The ear looks very different (different engraving lines inside, and flatter lobes; it kind of looks bigger) But bear in mind that the photo was taken in sunlight where yesterday's was in artificial light. See what you think?

I think the left image is pointing to a space (as near as dammit); the right image is a bit pixelated but I THINK it's to the left of a tooth? But you're right, it is a hard one to spot. I'm going to post my other penny now.

Just double checked all 39 again, under a better light and with my best glasses on, and they have exactly the same alignment as yours. REALLY? Which is odd, because my other high grade - with a hollowish neck - has the I clearly pointing to a space!

Hi Peckris, thats a shame because it was your post in the other thread that casts doubt if you are getting shadow, increase the distance between camera and coin. Most cameras these days have a large enough resolution that you do not have to get that close to get a decent size picture. I have attached some photos of how I take my pic's with a camera. Hope this helps a bit as it would be great if you could manage to get pic's to me. have a good weekend, Gary Here is my first effort : it's the obverse of an Unc 1911 (no hollow neck), with a close-up detail. As you can see, the I of BRITT is most clearly pointing to the left of a tooth, neither directly to, nor to a space.

You're welcome! But did I detect a smidgenette of irony there ... No, no ironey intended. I have been collecting now for over 30 years and up until now have concenrated on bronze and copper, pre 1970. I do have a few decimal coins in my collection but very very few, never really been interested but after following up on your mention of Christopher Ironside my interest has been awakened. I have a few Proof sets 72, 73, 75 and 1976 which I acquired in an auction lot which I was intending to sell. They are no longer on the "for sale" list! Oh, then I feel vindicated! Of your proof sets, the 1972 and 1973 (provided the latter hasn't got ugly toning) are the ones to especially hang on to. The 1972 is a complete set-only issue (excluding the 25p commem), and the 1973 seems to have acquired a kind of cachet; it is rarely found completely untoned, it also contains the only commem 50 pence for years and years to come, and it makes a sort of 'trilogy' along with 1971 and 1972 that later sets just don't.

Without seeing the reverse, it's a little difficult to say whether it's a misnamed 1937, or a 1947 colonial issue e.g. South Africa or New Zealand.

Hi Peckris, thats a shame because it was your post in the other thread that casts doubt if you are getting shadow, increase the distance between camera and coin. Most cameras these days have a large enough resolution that you do not have to get that close to get a decent size picture. I have attached some photos of how I take my pic's with a camera. Hope this helps a bit as it would be great if you could manage to get pic's to me. have a good weekend, Gary Ok, I will try to do again. (I've got a tripod somewhere, but it does mean I will have to avoid the macro setting as that requires getting very close). Let me see what I can do. I don't move very fast, so take a very deep breath before you hold it). Scanning is NOT a faux-pas! With scans you get a perfectly evenly lit, perfectly flat, and perfectly square-on picture. The one main drawback with scans is the flatness of tone - lustre doesn't properly come out at all. I would have scanned my 1911s but since I upgraded operating systems I've lost Photoshop, which was the link to my scanner.

We'll agree to differ on that one, I thought Chris Ironside's designs - especially the 50p were spot on. Also the reverse of £1 coins (most) and £2 unimetal. Where I think they stink are the reverse of most commem 50 pences, and just about every crown-sized piece in the whole era. Maybe I was a little hasty there Peckris! I looked up Chris Ironside on google and the first hit was this, the royal mint . After looking through the many designs I have to agree with you, they are not all bad. I may just start a decimal collection now Thanks for the pointer. You're welcome! But did I detect a smidgenette of irony there ... I must agree, the 50p Coin Design was very elegant. I also rather liked one of his earlier ideas for the Design for the 50p Coin. I believe that it was based on the 'Royal Arms.' A very talanted artist! I have a Proof old large 50p coin and the Britannia Design is really shown at its best on there, much more so than a coin meant for Circuation. Beautiful. Agreed. And I love the 'silk finish' you find on pre-1976 BU 50 pences, especially 1969 - 1970.

Nevertheless, actual pictures of YOUR coins would be of immense help to us (or scans of both sides). No disrespect, but grading is an art acquired over years of experience, and one man's 'good condition' often turns out to be ... well, not!

I still say, and I'm surprised no-one else has, that uncirculated 1946 / 49 threepenny bits are worth a lot of money (hundreds the pair). IF IF IF they really are uncirculated.

Hello Nick and welcome. Without re-reading Davies I am guessing that the dies are the same. The easiest tell for a maundy threepence is the toning. Currency issues tend to tone like all other silver coins whereas maundy issues tone with that lovely gun metal/steely blue tone. The coins have to be in high grade to differentiate. For B UNC coins the maundy usually appear prooflike with mirrored fields. I have sold a couple of early B UNCS and had to sell them as maundy issue becauase they looked like proof strikes. The currency, as I'm sure you will know, was worth about £100 more than I asked. Hope that is of some help. Thanks, that does help and will certainly help in future, as long as I remember to buy toned examples The specific examples I was looking at were the Maundy coins of Edward VII which are all the same Davies type '1 A'. If the Maundy '1 A' is the same as the currency '1 A' then it should be trivial to differentiate 1905-9 currency threepences as they all have a type 'B' reverse. I think I need to do some more research to try and firm up a theory. Nick It wouldn't matter too much with Edward VII (except academically) as the Maundy and currency 3d wouldn't be so far apart in value. Where it matters is with the early colonial issues of Victoria, where the differential (stupidly in my opinion, as all Maundy is a tiny mintage) is colossal.

The mont? I hope they said "Good moaning" to you!

That looks like WRL engraved on the reverse under the shield on the left. If so, then it stands for Westair Reproductions Ltd, which pretty much confirms what it is, I'm afraid. And the clincher is the raised "rim" it seems to have in places - you just don't see that on a genuine hammered coin

Do you realise this topic is abbreviated on the top page to "I have a coin and a friend.." I say, that's a bit greedy isn't it?

Ok, this isn't a "table" in the sense of a spreadsheet "worksheet" or a Word "table". When you think of a database table, it's really another word for a file, i.e. a collection of records with data arranged in "fields", like a spreadsheet. Unlike a spreadsheet, you can arrange the fields wherever you want on the page, and format each field differently from each other; you're not limited to rows and columns. Think of it this way : In a spreadsheet, each column is one field, and each row is one record. That's why it's quite easy to import a spreadsheet to a database. A database where you have defined all the fields ("column names") is an empty file waiting to be filled. As soon as you add one record ("row") you have your table (file), and can add as many records as you want. When you're working with Access - if it's a new file (File menu), the first thing you will be asked to do is define the fields you want (and whether each is to be text, or numeric, or a date, or a picture, or a calculation, or a function, etc), and you can always add to these as you go along. Once you have a basic set of fields defined, the next thing you need to do is New Record or Add Record (File Menu again? not sure with Access, but have a look in the menus). That will then let you input data into the relevant fields. It's like a prettier spreadsheet really - with those you define what each column is to be, and what formatting, rules, etc will be applied, then you start entering data into each row. A database is no different, it works on the same principle.

Basically because there are punters who think there's an easy few bob to be made, and that there are mugs to make it out of. Or sad people with too much time on their hands (teenage boys trying to raise cash for their next computer game). Who knows? What we hate is the fact that all that crap clogs up eBay's coin listings and makes it a pain to sift through.

I tried, I really tried, but if there's a technique to photographing coins without special equipment, I don't know it. I've tried the macro setting on my camera, but each time I go in close it casts a dark shadow on the coin and I fail. Sorry.

We'll agree to differ on that one, I thought Chris Ironside's designs - especially the 50p were spot on. Also the reverse of £1 coins (most) and £2 unimetal. Where I think they stink are the reverse of most commem 50 pences, and just about every crown-sized piece in the whole era.

I reckon there was a H there, light patches below and between the 8 and 7 where we all know the H should be, Here's another 1876 no-H with clearer pictures this time: 1876 Penny no-H And sanded down too - look at the 6 !!

Uncirculated 1946 and 1949 brass 3d are worth into 3 figures, the pair of them would be worth hundreds. But are you sure they are uncirculated? Pictures of both sides are essential.

It appears to be an Elizabeth I 6th issue Crown or Halfcrown, mintmark 1 - the which depends on the size, as has been stated. If genuine, you are looking at a coin worth at least 3 figures, but maybe over £1000. However, the "genuine" part of that assessment is everything. There are many reproductions.

Yes but be fair - the seller describes it as a "shocking picture" - can't do HIM under the Trades Descriptions

set to makro and point and shoot, go for it Peckris I will try! Presumably you're only interested in obverses, right?

Yes, lower grade 1952s are really quite common (the total mintage was over a million, which is low for a coin, but still high in numerical terms).

I might be interested too - I love 18th Century tokens, but a high grade early 19th C is almost as good.