Peckris

No no, you didn't. I was genuinely glad to learn, even though (when it comes to assessing and buying coins) it's of no relevance to me. So thank you for sharing that.

The best theory is the 'late forgery' one. The theory they were supplying the halfcrown market during the 'interregnum' falls down on two counts : 1. not enough specimens show up (though if the Mint were fastidious about chasing them that might account for that) 2. the types are always the post-1874 shallow portrait types Interesting though. But not £400-£900 interesting. I might go close to a ton but no more.

I think you misunderstand me Huss. When I talked about 'colour' I was sepcifically responding to VickyS's use of the word, which he seemed to be using in relation to "Mint lustre red". I am quite clear (& agree with you) that Mint lustre cannot be restored. I'm really not interested in the science of it, but thank you both for enlightening me as to precisely what lustre is, I hadn't known that. I am simply - irrespective of the science - quite familiar with bronze and copper (and even silver) lustre. But to me (and oh god I wish I had a macro to avoid repeating myself to the point of nausea) "lustre" is a one-way ticket from the Mint, that once going-going-gone cannot be brought back. It may be "flow lines", it may all be Boulton Cartwheels, but whatever it is, we all - most of us - know what it is when we see it. And those examples from the Workman Sale that I quoted are where you can go and see it! Then Spinks are using a different definition of UNC in their auction catalogues than they use in their catalogue! But I absolutely agree with you 100% about "if you like it buy it .. and explain it to the wife, from a galaxy far far away"

I use Nero photoshop, when i take my pictures i always have the camera setting on the highest setting, my pictures are then generally about 1 meg each, i then crop around the coin which takes it down to the 700kb mark, then i resize it down to the 150kb mark, but always save the high res pictures for myself. Through nero photshopi can also enlarge pix, the picture here on the Half Sov was only around 40kb, so i cropped the dealers picture then blew up the OBV picture so you could see what i was looking at. So any thoughts on the Half Sov, i'm not convinced its a repunched V as the line under it looks to straight to me. Thanks for your response to my PS question It doesn't look like an underlying V to me. Difficult to see what it is though. Possibly an I ?

To my eyes, looking at the photos, item 6 has only limited lustre - you can see it in the legend and other points, ditto the reverse. The rest looks quite brown, which they may well define as "lightly toning" but to my mind simply CANNOT merit the description "Full lustre". It's also telling that Spink have a footnote in their catalogue in a few places : "Copper coins graded UNC in this catalogue have full Mint lustre". Which seems unequivocal to me. We're going to have to differ on this one Vick. You see, lustre to me IS colour, always has been, and has been too to all the dealers I've bought off over the years. And looking through the Workman sale list, apart from the coins we've mentioned, the later ones seem to refer to lustre as colour. For example : 84 : "Uncirculated with good lustre on both sides." (Yes - the colour is obvious) 86 : "Uncirculated with full lustre, lightly toned." (slightly disagree - I'd describe it as NBU, the colour is wearing a little on the reverse) 104, 105, 106 : "Uncirculated with full lustre" (Again, obviously BU in the sense of full colour) These are all talking about colour.

How do you manage to upload such large pictures az? No way are any of my Photoshop pictures (even at 5/12 minimum acceptable quality) anywhere near as small as 150k. The strange thing is, I can upload a picture that's close to the limit - 140k say - but when it's uploaded here it's apparently only half that size. However, the forum software isn't going to let me upload a >150k picture "knowing" it will be compressed smaller, will it?

Vick, you're not reading what I've written (in at least two posts so far) : "lustre" is what a coin leaves the Mint in full possession of. Over time this either oxidises or wears off, leaving traces often in the legend. "Sheen" (my term) is nothing to do with lustre. It is a quality of a copper or bronze coin that is especially attractive, as it is a silky slightly shiny reflective appearance. The coins I have with "sheen" HAVE NO LUSTRE ON THEM. NO red. But they do have this sheen quality. To wit : one 1797 twopence, two Vic copper pennies, a 1799 halfpenny, and an 1806 penny. Sheen is NOT repeat NOT an imprecise or inexact term for lustre. IT'S A DIFFERENT THING ENTIRELY. I should know, I dreamed up the term way back in this long thread.

To be fair VS, not many dealers and collectors know about or refer to these microwaves. Probably many are like me - they see a new coin with yellow/gold/red lustre, they think of it like a thin coating, and lo and behold it wears off exactly as if it was. "Sheen" is my own term, though others may have coined it also (pun intended). It is a prperty that any coin may have, though full lustre obviously trumps it. As I say, I have 3 or 4 high grade copper coins with no lustre (or only faint traces), but which have this wondrous silky shimmery surface. The coins are natural metal in colour, i.e. brown or reddish-brown, typical copper, but nevertheless they have this sheen. It is NOT lustre. That looks like classic "lustre" az - traces thereof. That's as good a term as any!

No, I said YOU were using the term interchangeably Vick! I've never heard this "Lustre is not a chemical coating but a deformity of the struck metal" thesis before. I had always thought it was a thin coating applied during the minting process, but I'm happy to be corrected on that score. Be that as it may, it is EFFECTIVELY equivalent to such a coating, as it wears away exactly as if it was, revealing the "bare metal" beneath. One might consider it like a very thin coat of paint (even though it isn't) as that's how it behaves : i.e. it wears unevenly where it is most rubbed, and shows the under metal; it reacts to atmospheric conditions; it lingers finally in faint traces where least exposed. It behaves exactly like a coating that has been applied, whatever the actual process to impart it, and for all intents and purposes that's how collectors and dealers over the years (with the honourable exception of yourself, VickyS) have tended to regard it. At least in my experience.

I think it's not dissimilar to that mis-strike you had a month or so ago, they've run out of room at the bottom. If you can get it for a reasonable price, might as well pick it up I reckon. Not so sure they ran out of room at the bottom 400 as there is plenty of space above, so perhaps a mis-aligned 1? The 1 also looks thinner than the rest of the numerals When you say "thinner" I don't see that? But perhaps you mean in less high relief ... ? It certainly looks like the die is suffering slightly.

Yes, that's am interesting point. If all the original Mint lustre is present but no longer blazing, that MAY be a case for CCC's term "BU slightly toning" (though I don't think they use it this way, often). LOL @ "tone when I wasn't looking". I agree mostly about Victorian pennies, though if all the Mint lustre is there but fading to a kind of pale but slightly matte look, then we have the problem of how to describe it in terms that everyone could agree? (Which is where a picture paints 1000 words of course) Proofs already have their own grade : "FDC", and therefore it should never be necessary to use BU in relation to them. I think you are mixing two terms VickyS : "lustre" and "sheen". Lustre is what is imparted by the Mint, a chemical film over the coin, I'm not sure what its chemistry is. What I understand you to be describing is "sheen", which I agree can be present when all lustre has gone, and I have a few gorgeous copper coins that have wondrous sheen but no lustre. I agree with you Derek, and I wonder if this a difference between the two sides of the Pond? Certainly in Britain, the term for Proofs has always been FDC and if a proof has suffered any degradation it is described verbally (or there's a picture). It would never be termed "BU". But in all the 40 years I've been involved with coins (in UK), the term BU refers to original Mint lustre, and lustre refers to the same, however much or little of it remains.

I'm afraid CCC are always describing coins in this particular style, and I've learned to take it with a large pinch of salt. At least there are pictures. Couldn't disagree more. To me, lustre means "red" otherwise there is no sense in the description, e.g. "50% lustre". Mint lustre is mint lustre is mint lustre. To me, the only area of doubt is where coins have been "Mint toned" using hypo. These coins, when "fully lustred" should have a gorgeous dark purple sheen, and if any brown is showing through, they are not. But at the same time, I can understand some dealers / collectors preferring to avoid BU in relation to those particular issues. Otherwise BU should mean "fully red". That's what I've always understood anyway.

A thousand dollars for someone slicing two Edward halfpennies in two and splicing them together?

It has a sort of yellowish-brown appearance, you don't see that? Silver should be greyer / bluer than that. But it could simply be discoloured. See my example below for the more 'usual' colour. The legend is correct : GEORGIVS is Latin for George (the Romans used V for U). The Spink catalgoue is published annually if you want an up-to-date version. Or, if you're not interested in values, "English Silver Coinage" (abbreviation ESC) is the standard reference book on milled silver coins.

What i don't get is the huge over inflated price for a Mac, its positively rude what they charge for a basic Mac, perhaps thats why you have Mac haters They did an independent test on that a few years back, and when you compared like-for-like, it wasn't a big margin after all. It did include such factors as bundled software e.g. Garageband, lifespan of the machines, quality of components used, etc. It didn't include greater productivity through ease of use, lack of crashes, viruses, etc. I think the only genuinely cheap PCs (yes there are some very cheap PCs but they are mostly rubbish and won't last long) are from Dell, who cut out the middleman. Having said all that, I do think PCs are better than Macs in one or two areas. Gaming for one (though that's become irrelevant since Macs moved to Intel and can run Windows), and voice processing software for another. And you can upgrade the graphics card on PCs, which will matter to you if you're a hardcore dedicated gamer; however, the GFX card on a new Mac is generally state-of-the-art so it's unlikely you would even notice obsolescence for at least 3 years assuming you are not buying end-of-line.

Would it be classed as a misstrike rather than a deliberate variety, Bernie? Though it has to be said, an accidental rotation of exactly 180º does make you stop and think. That is a puzzler of a question !!! I don't know if it was possible to place a die the wrong way round in the press. Looking at the overall question of varieties, many blundered coins are considered a different variety, such as mules, overdates. Hm, I'm not sure I agree about mules and overdates. The former is a genuine strike using dies that were deliberately (1926ME) or unintentionally (undated 20p) used together. The latter is a deliberate change to the date, even if the puncher got it wrong. However, grease or other material getting into the die, or a brockage, or something of that sort, is a totally random accident beyond the agency of a human being. That's how I would differentiate them anyway. The 'total random accident' coins just don't interest me at all as they are generally unique and therefore not worth chasing. That leaves your 1928 penny, which as you say is a genuine mystery, how the dies managed to rotate through 180º.

Sure. That's why they now have a 10% market share (up from around 2% some years ago). That's why they are now worth more than Microsoft. That's why they run Windows games faster than PCs do. That's why Windows imitates OS X more and more with every new release. That's why they have the largest market share of laptops of any individual manufacturer. Sure. Everyone hates them, that's why. Never said everyone hates them, just correcting the post to reflect my opinion. It's interesting. There's a small but dedicated group of Apple-haters (all of them PC users) but when you stop and ask any of them exactly why they hate Apple so, they don't have any rational or logical reason to give! (Not one that's based in fact, anyway). They just start to get all emotional and defensive and you can't get a clear word out of them. There's no sense of "Oh, it's just another system / computer / company - each to their own". No, there's a real sense of loathing comes out, totally irrational, as if a Mac had fallen on their head when they were in their pram. It's like some years ago, I worked with a guy who loved music, but hated The Beatles. When asked why, he just said "Overhyped rubbish! They were never THAT good! Anyway, their music all sounds the same to me." I think he was just reacting against the prevailing view of history. A natural iconoclast .. like Apple-bashers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Augustus_I_of_Hanover

Oh right, I understand. Yes I've seen that "rule" that some sellers apply. It begs the question - if you're a new eBayer buyer, and sellers won't sell to you until you've made 5 purchases, how will you ever get the 5 feedbacks you need in order to buy something? Sounds a classic Catch 22 to me.

Sixpence probably...(sixpences are about 20mm., shillings about 25mm.). NF-F I'd give it. Either way £3.50 is a bargain. Please pat yourself on the back! Sizes really didn't change that much - the last issue shilling being 24mm. I'd concur (though I'd give the coin an overall average of Fine). Five years ago it rated £15 in Spink, maybe a pound or two more now. It's heavily toned, but don't be tempted to clean it. The slightly reddish appearance may be a colour cast from your scanner or camera or digital image software. The price you paid is more than fair, I'd say a bargain! You can store silver coins safely in 2.5" square plastic envelopes, though make sure the environment is dry and salt-free. Or you can buy coin albums with plastic inserts. Or there are specialist coin trays with red felt linings that won't react with the metal in coins. Oh, one final thing, I'm pretty sure that's a sixpence from the size.

Sure. That's why they now have a 10% market share (up from around 2% some years ago). That's why they are now worth more than Microsoft. That's why they run Windows games faster than PCs do. That's why Windows imitates OS X more and more with every new release. That's why they have the largest market share of laptops of any individual manufacturer. Sure. Everyone hates them, that's why.

Some absurdly low prices there. Is the penny bubble bursting, or were there just too many going at one time? Wish I'd been there to boost my own collection. A couple of nice 1865/3 in reasonable grades (GF and VF) both less than £100. An opportunity missed By the way, did other people get caught out by their eccentric cataloguing? I was scrolling through wondering what the logic was, then I realised they catalogue in alphabetical order of denomination! Couldn't agree more, Peck. I went through almost wincing with the pain of great opportunity not even lost, but never known about in the first place !!! Some amazing bargains there, or, is the bottom beginning to drop out of the market ? Perhaps everyone was waiting for the Workman sale and saving their pennies? Um, pun intended.

There are very many "To Hanover" tokens - usually brass, and used as gaming counters. There are probably a lot of minor variations on the theme. I do remember vaguely something about the origins of "To Hanover". It may be something to do with the British monarchs also being Electors of Hanover, but only the male line, so Victoria wasn't allowed to be. Someone would have been needed to be Elector of Hanover on Victoria's accession, it may be something to do with that? I know the reverse of the tokens show a male figure on horseback, possibly waving their sword in the direction of Hanover?

But.. but.. but.. surely we are not supposed to clean coins?

I would just like to point out that anyone who bids (or even thinks about bidding, or even lingers) where a seller has less than 50% feedback absolutely needs their head examining, and quite possibly deserves everything they get .. or not as the case may be. Will be.