Peckris

Sensible buy. It's not the priciest Elizabeth II halfcrown, it's sort of halfway between 1954 (the scarcest in UNC) and 1967 (the commonest). Mostly you can't go wrong with Elizabeth II 1950s coins in UNC, they will do ok in years to come. And those halfcrowns are rather nice (in UNC).

No commission from Canon but if you do like it send £10 to ... Sorry no refunds given for advice. Seriously once you get it would be nice if you could take some snaps and share them with us and give us your verdict. Snaps of coins or salmo salar? The former is no problem, the latter may be a very long wait How are you finding it? I take it all of the pics on your site are from the canon? They are good crisp shots. Are you using a tripod or flying solo? Yes, I'd be interested to know this too. What accessories do people use to photo coins in an absolutely flat plane at right angles to the lens? I meant the coins but pics of a Salmon would be nice. I used a tripod and coins on a flat surface.I sometimes tilt a coin to get a better reflection of its surface, particularly to capture colourful coins. I'm thinking about buying a couple of daylight bulbs/ lights but at the moment found the best option is natural day light. I've got a small piece of glass which I am going to attempt to use for taking picture of proofs through. Has anyone seen this site? it has some good tips for coin Photography: http://www.blackmountaincoins.com/coins/My-Approach-to-Coin-Photography/subpage201.html Daylight bulbs I found to be almost as bad as a flash. I used to do a lot of antique silver plate (that's sterling or britannia items not dressed up copper for the uninitiated), hence the Argentum in the title. The daylight bulbs were way too bright and the only way I could use them was by lighting the walls of a photography tent externally with the object inside. This is obviously no use for coins at all. I favour natural daylight like yourself, but we are in very short supply in North Cumbria most days! I should have the new beastie on Thursday according to Argos direct!!!!....,,,,so I will do a couple of pics of the same coin with the old and new camera. I only resize pictures and have never even attempted photo shop, suite, or whatever else is available. I'm usually doing batches of 20 or so coins at a time so I wouldn't have the time if I could raise the inclination to titivate pictures! Besides, evidence tampering was always a big no no I use Photoshop quite a lot, but it's almost got too many features for the average punter. Whereas iPhoto has only a limited range but they are all there in one row of simple icons and contain the ones most needed : exposure, levels, colour balance, sharpness, contrast, rotate, crop, plus a few basic effects (sepia, B&W, 'aged', vignette, etc). For us collectors, iPhoto would do everything we need doing really.

Shame on you, selling undersized groats. I'll have the Weights & Measures people onto you.

This was an early undocumented attempt at decimalisation at the end of the 18th Century, trialled in Ireland. The coin in question is an early 50p. (Oh, it's NOT April 1st today? Soz.) Seriously, it may be an undocumented 7 over 9 variety, as there were many die punching errors before the 19th Century. This example may have the 9 showing strongly below the 7. But as has been said, a picture or scan is a must. If you can enlarge just the date area that would be even better.

Hello Howard, Welcome to the forum. There are plenty of users on here that will help with your coins. I think you're better off keeping the old stuff than buying an undated 20p though, overhyped and overated! John. I agree 100%! Save your money. Those undated 20p's are a veritable flash in the pan, unlike the 1983 'NEW PENCE' 2p reverse, which is very rare. But modern coins are, in the eyes of most people here, not as attractive as older ones. For me personally that means mostly from 1936 back (George V and earlier). To save a lot of time, if you have a scanner, scan your coins (carefully!) in batches, both sides, and let us judge them that way - if you try to do them all singly, you (and we) will be here forever. And to start with, do your oldest and best condition ones first - if you can't make out the legend or design, don't bother! Did your grandad ever mention "never clean coins"? Still applies. Don't.

And why is it that the recorded voice in every post office throughout the land says "CASHier number..." and not "CaSHIER number..." as it should be pronounced?

No commission from Canon but if you do like it send £10 to ... Sorry no refunds given for advice. Seriously once you get it would be nice if you could take some snaps and share them with us and give us your verdict. Snaps of coins or salmo salar? The former is no problem, the latter may be a very long wait How are you finding it? I take it all of the pics on your site are from the canon? They are good crisp shots. Are you using a tripod or flying solo? Yes, I'd be interested to know this too. What accessories do people use to photo coins in an absolutely flat plane at right angles to the lens?

Thanks for the tip, Huss. I've got quite a few coins that I might want to offload, and a quality camera is something I've been thinking about for some time. That looks a good prospect Think about more than coins, 1949. A camera is something you will want for other purposes too, so bear in mind the following : 1. Do you want no more than a point & shoot snapshot camera to keep in your pocket? If so, Huss's camera would be an excellent choice* 2. Are you SERIOUS about photography? In which case a DSLR is the thing to go for (though much more bulky and expensive) 3. Somewhere between the two? In which case the Lumix (which is unbelievably light by the way) would be perfect & cover most situations * but bear in mind that most phone cameras have improved no end recently : if you buy the Canon (above) you won't be getting something a million miles better than what's in a decent phone, though it will do coins much better. So if you have a decent phone already, that's another factor to consider. I know quite a lot about photography, so please feel free to pick my brains (euwww!) if you want more help. Thanks for the offer, Peck. Much appreciated. What I would be looking for is a not too expensive digital camera, which takes sharp close up images. Huss's phone looked just the job ~ although obviously that is on recommendation. No reason not to accept what he says, 100% though. To be honest with you, I don't like phone cameras much. My experience so far has been that they certainly don't give an accurate representation of people, and make their faces look over red & blown up. I had one taken of me recently, for facebook, and I didn't use it because it made me look like a thick, sweaty, country yokel, just back from baling hay. No offence to rural folk, but not the image I wanted to project. A subsequent one taken with a normal camera was much better. That being the case, I don't think I would trust phone cameras to do a good job with coins. I absolutely agree (not about the thick sweaty country yokel obviously, I value my teeth ). If you just want 'point & shoot' that will do coins, Huss's Canon (excellent make BTW) is just the ticket and costs under £80, so good value. A good review is here : http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_powershot_a480_review/ Bear in mind - it has an optical zoom that's 3X, which in old money means it goes from reasonably wide angle to very short telephoto, i.e. slightly closer than the good old standard lens of an SLR. The Lumix is way more expensive - not far short of £300 - but it has 18X zoom which gets very close and would serve pretty much every need. But it sounds more than you are 'up for'. It has a good reputation - though been around far less long than Canon - but it does have Leica lenses which is about as venerated as you can get. Anyway, from the price and size comparison, I'd say the Canon would suit you. That review also looks at its competitors by the way - you might see something you like even more.

The "book" says 'Rare'. That's the same rating it gives the first reverse 1940 penny ("especially in mint state"), and the 1926ME penny gets 'Very Rare', so that's a guide. I still think the value wouldn't be particularly high as there probably isn't much of a market. But maybe the other guys here would differ on that?

I think we all see want we want to see at times. Here's one that fooled me - a reentered "O" in ONE in a 1903 penny Ebay picture on left No doubt here it's the same coin - another 99p dream shattered David Object lesson in how you can never fully trust photos. Strike that fully 1949 - I know what Photoshop can do! That was just for normal photos, Peck, where no intentional distortion has occurred. Photoshop is for con men, pure and simple. Bit strong, 1949! I'm with Derek on this - it's very useful for adjusting the exposure and levels, contrast, colour balance etc - all kinds of things. But yes, you can pervert it to 'improve' coins at which point it is a menace, but what can you do? My solution is never to buy from anyone who doesn't give a 7-day moeny-back guarantee if not satisfied.

Thanks for the tip, Huss. I've got quite a few coins that I might want to offload, and a quality camera is something I've been thinking about for some time. That looks a good prospect Think about more than coins, 1949. A camera is something you will want for other purposes too, so bear in mind the following : 1. Do you want no more than a point & shoot snapshot camera to keep in your pocket? If so, Huss's camera would be an excellent choice* 2. Are you SERIOUS about photography? In which case a DSLR is the thing to go for (though much more bulky and expensive) 3. Somewhere between the two? In which case the Lumix (which is unbelievably light by the way) would be perfect & cover most situations * but bear in mind that most phone cameras have improved no end recently : if you buy the Canon (above) you won't be getting something a million miles better than what's in a decent phone, though it will do coins much better. So if you have a decent phone already, that's another factor to consider. I know quite a lot about photography, so please feel free to pick my brains (euwww!) if you want more help.

Useful link, that first one! Unfortunately the second one is only of interest to hammered enthusiasts. Although it says "hammered coins", it does in fact list most or all UK coin fairs. Take a look. You're right - how confusing! (Unfortunately the Phoenix Fairs aren't listed, which are the only fairs in this part of the country) Well, if you think about it, not really. Most coin fairs will feature all types of coins, milled as well as hammered. Ergo: the diary is relevant to all enthusiasts. Ah, no, it wasn't the diary itself that is confusing 1949 - I meant the name! Why call it "Hammered" when it's relevant to all collectors?

Unfortunately I don't have access to my numismatic bookshelf right this minute Bishop, but I do remember (from the 1970 Coins and Medals Annual survey of known varieties) that this was known about back then. A scarcity rating would be provided too, but I'll have to convey that when I've retrieved the book in question. As to value, I wouldn't get your hopes up. Despite some of the decimal varieties being extremely scarce, they've never really found an enthusiastic market out there. You could try it on eBay and see if you get any bites.

I think we all see want we want to see at times. Here's one that fooled me - a reentered "O" in ONE in a 1903 penny Ebay picture on left No doubt here it's the same coin - another 99p dream shattered David Object lesson in how you can never fully trust photos. Strike that fully 1949 - I know what Photoshop can do!

Better picture.

I think we all see want we want to see at times. Here's one that fooled me - a reentered "O" in ONE in a 1903 penny Ebay picture on left No doubt here it's the same coin - another 99p dream shattered David Yes, an illusion not helped by the fact the eBay picture is ovoid - clearly the camera wasn't quite in the same plane as the coin.

These are rather poor images of a 3d dated 1562. Definitely a replica in pewter. The one I encountered could well have been pewter too. Which might account for the 'no smell'.

I am ..... ..... is the right answer! Let's hope 1) Torres stays 2) the new buys turn up trumps 3) Roy Hodgson can work miracles 4) Your mission to go and demand of the owners that they sell the club damn quick, is successful!!

That's a fantastic job! Love it - if I'd seen it for sale I would certainly have bought it. What was the freeman/gouby number? Number Two, surely?

One of these? That's her!

He must have read your post Mark, he's added two sharp photos of this replica Chris -- I wouldn't laugh too hard -- I just checked and the coin realized £101.00 OMG, there's one born every minute. When you consider they're available new for about £15 - £25. Pffft. I remember seeing one that was a good forgery go for between £200 - £300, but that was worth it, really convincing. This thing is such an obvious replica it should come with an "Any resemblance to any known coin living or dead" disclaimer.

A few months back I got a Lumix FZ38 camera (ok, not a cheap 'point & shoot' but way cheaper than a DSLR and it does an astonishing job). I've not yet tried to take coins with it but I must have a go sometime, inspired by what I've seen here.

Welcome to the forums James Pictures or scans of your coins would help a lot. You may have to do it in batches as you can only upload 150k maximum per post.

Do be careful - there are (as you'd expect) more forgeries in gold pieces than any other metal. However, with fairly common dates that shouldn't be an issue, except for 1887 where apparently there was a veritable factory turning out gold fakes of that date some years back. It's also very difficult to pick up bargains as the bullion value is considerable and ensures all gold pieces are 'worth their weight in gold' however common or worn.

Talking of the Windmill Britannia, there's a wonderful 18th Century pattern halfpenny which shows a nude Britannia! It's in Pecker. Er, I mean Peck.