Peckris

Yeah, I was too. The reply offered seems a tad 'smart alec'.

Free - map of Italy (or it COULD be S. America) lovingly engraved on this penny (it was more evident before the coin was scoured clean...) Free - map of Italy (or it COULD be S. America) lovingly engraved on this penny (it was more evident before the coin was scoured clean...) If where ware were wear,we're wondering where wear would be worn to good condition. Thamnk you Peter Piper

Free - map of Italy (or it COULD be S. America) lovingly engraved on this penny (it was more evident before the coin was scoured clean...)

Because if all that's different is the 'finish' (which could be completely undetectable by the time the coin's EF) then it's not really a die pairing - all details are exactly the same, i.e. design. In any case, how do you know it's the die not the blank that's been polished? E.g. 1961 halfcrowns. And if the coin has not been stored properly, the 'polish' could have disappeared, or conversely the owner could have imparted a light polish to the unpolished side. It will probably all boil down to a matter of opinion, but I'm with Rob, it's not a mule by any traditional meaning of the word.

I would personally say "no". Finish is a nebulous kind of thing to make a determinant. After all, would you describe as a 'mule' a coin that had full lustre on one side, but none on the other, even if you COULD prove that's how it left the Mint? I think 'specimen', 'proof', 'polished die', 'proof-like', 'early strike', are far too vague terms for something as specific as a mule. Put it this way, have you ever seen a coin that's a proof on one side but not the other?

I've not heard of that one, why is it a mule? Nor me - I have the 'polished die' variety from the World Trade Fair, but I'd not heard of any other varieties.

Davies quote two reverse varieties for the 1935 crown but I've only ever seen the one type. I just consulted Davies - from his illustrations this looks one of the most trivial micro-varieties ever IF that pointing is the only difference. I can't believe that the average completist would be that interested?

Considering that the 'dot' is supposed to have been a deliberate mark rather than a die flaw, the "lighter thinner" variant must be a gradual infilling of the die, i.e. in an older state. I'm afraid I can't see the third dot at all (with the die crack) - how do you know it is there? Just spotted O'NE on eBay - item number 261617055626 I so want one.... It's there all right. What's worrying is that there are two others seemingly as well : one just offboard the O (between 4 and 5 oclock), and another to the left of Britannia's forearm, down towards her wrist. That would make me stop and think.

It's interesting, when you study the use of the shield on coins throughout history, engravers seem to have had a free hand - there is such a variety of design, it's almost as if they were told "there is no ACTUAL shield, so it's up to you how you depict it, providing it carries the royal coat of arms".

I think it's down to individual decision and taste. I've become a type collector but I still have my date run of brass 3ds - I recently spent the most I've ever spent on a brass 3d (£39) on a BU 1948; my NEF 1949 cost far less ... in the 1990s, and my NBU 1951 cost me 20p, though that was an unusual circumstance! But it's quite 'ok' to mix and match - for example I have one UNC Edward VII halfcrown (1910), but I also have a VF 1903 and a GVG 1905. I don't think there's any fixed rule about it. I'd like a high grade KN penny, but not both; and I suspect I'll never ever be able to justify buying a 1922-reverse-1927 penny. On the whole though, I'd rather go for a BU common coin these days, than concentrate on a rarity. That's the 'type collector' in me.

I do remember those American Civil War cards! There was a bit of a fuss about them as I remember - rather a lot featured soldiers with blood pouring from open wounds. PG-rated stuff by today's standards. Wasn't there also a 'War Of The Worlds' series equally as "scary"? Did the Civil War packets also include repro and/or fantasy banknotes of the period too? I collected the Batman, Captain Scarlet, Tarzan, footballers too. Also; the cards which came with tea such as 'Trees of Britain', 'Kings and Queens' etc. Yeah, you're right - I'd forgotten all about those! They were pretty small as I remember (probably folded once to fit into the wrapper?) and could not be confused with any kind of genuine banknote. I seem to remember we wanted the high-value notes, which were of course much less common than the low-value ones.

1935 crowns would have been widely available via banks and post offices as part of the Jubilee celebrations, ditto 1951, ditto 1953, ditto 1965. I'm not sure how 1902 crowns were distributed, I imagine it was probably due to something like 'public subscription'? Strictly speaking, none of these should be described as 'circulation strikes' because, though they were legal tender and no doubt a proportion were spent, that was not the intention behind their production but to mark some (usually) royal occasion; in other words, they were commemoration pieces.

I do remember those American Civil War cards! There was a bit of a fuss about them as I remember - rather a lot featured soldiers with blood pouring from open wounds. PG-rated stuff by today's standards. Wasn't there also a 'War Of The Worlds' series equally as "scary"?

7 is a magical number...

CCGB rates it about £1.5k in VF which yours isn't, but better than Fine I'd say. Probably about £1k to the right buyer.

Not only ON underpants, but IN underpants too...

That's a bargain and a half Dave! Even 20 years ago, my UNC-and-very-nearly-BU 1954 and 1959 halfcrowns cost me £4 apiece. I agree with you about "not worth spending the money" on absolutely perfect specimens of them.

What I first took to be "la la la la la" turns out to be "1d 1d 1d 1d 1d"

The guy I told you about above (with the iPhone - he also has "proper" cameras too) came up with an interesting exercise a while back : pick one single focal length, and go out shooting as if you had a roll of 36 film in the camera - i.e. don't take more than 36 shots, don't preview what you've just shot, don't delete, and don't post-process apart from colour balance and exposure. I went out and followed that, and it was really creative; the 36 shots I got weren't all equally good, but I stopped and thought about each one and I was generally pleased with the results. There's a lot in what you say. I hankered after a Minolta XD7 for years - I finally bought one secondhand 11 years after they first came out. Imagine that nowadays? (There again, have you noticed the manufacturers like Fuji and Sony and Panasonic all now carrying at least one line with old-fashioned manual rings and controls? I'm currently lusting after the LX100...)

I still actually prefer books. Same here. Yeah, but with the Kindle app I can read it like a book, and it takes no space on my bookshelves

Transnistria?? Surely a novelist's invention!

No, not as scarce, but then I don't think the 1958 and 1959 halfcrowns are anything like as rare in AUNC+ than the equivalent florins. It's all relative, but I think the steady price hike for the 1960 over the years proves it's elusive (CCGB has it 2x the value of 1961 and 1964 in BU which seems possibly about right). I think the late 60s is 'the exception that proves the rule' - some modern coins went from 'uncollectable' to hyped-up 'super rare in BU' almost overnight. Now the market has got a truer perspective and prices are more realistic. For example, Liz II 50s florins are much more difficult than halfcrowns and this has been recognised for quite some time now.

It's not the camera so much, it's the eyes and brain behind it... I belong to a photography forum where one of the most talented members produces awesome shots with his iPhone.

Those 5p and 10p pieces lasted until 1990 and 1992 respectively. Before then, it was still possible to find the occasional pre-47 silver coin in your change. This explanation doesn't explain why some halfcrown dates - demonetised in 1969 - are also so hard? Yer 1954 halfcrown had a maximum 15 years in circulation; compare that with up to 38 years for the equivalent florin. I think ozjohn makes a good point about how quick they wore. Add to that the abysmally shallow designs of the larger denominations.