Accumulator

I simply buy the coin I want. If it happens to be in a slab, then fine. If it happens to be raw, that's fine too, though it makes photography a lot easier. There's an interesting parallel to coins, with wine in the US. If you've never come across him before, look up Robert Parker. In the States, prices of fine wines are, to a huge extent, determined by the 'score' (50-100) given by this man. If you want to hear the UK view (not positive towards Mr. Parker and his influence), read the intro to one of Hugh Johnson's annual wine guides! Here in the UK, wine scores have never really taken off, much like slabs.

I am assuming it is not Chingford then? Morning All, Robs right, unfortunately not me or Family, The chap in question used to attend the London Coin Shows in Bloomsbury, selling old catalogues and books, I saw him my last time there but that was at the end of last year, I haven't been to any this year. . He had a website called Springnumbooks, I tried it this morning but the link doesn't work anymore, John I bumped into John at Coinex (I think?) last year, selling old books and catalogues. I always assumed you were one and the same! Is he interested in the copper penny series, or is that only yourself? I'd once heard that one of you might even be considering a book? A definitive book is badly needed and, with a good numbering system, might even replace Peck and Bramah in auction descriptions for 1837-1860 (and perhaps even 1797 - 1860). The Chap you met wasn't me, but I think could be the Author of the book Peter linked to earlier in the Thread, I am the Copper collector 1828-1860, I leave the earlier Soho pieces/dates to those that understand them. As for a Copper book, not just yet, still at that stage where I am finding varieties and then trying to prove them and reasoning behind them, lots do get put onto Michael Goubys site for generally reference, and as I have said before I am always happy to answer any questions on the series, if I can. Regards John Thanks for clearing that up John. You've answered a couple of questions on the copper series for me in the past. I always feel it's rather a neglected area and the coins are stunning, so good luck with your ongoing research and hopefully a book in due course! 1828 seems an arbitrary cut-off date? I guess it negates the need to spend a lot on a good 1827 example! I really must spend more time on the 1837-60 pennies…. something for the long winter evenings!

I am assuming it is not Chingford then? Morning All, Robs right, unfortunately not me or Family, The chap in question used to attend the London Coin Shows in Bloomsbury, selling old catalogues and books, I saw him my last time there but that was at the end of last year, I haven't been to any this year. . He had a website called Springnumbooks, I tried it this morning but the link doesn't work anymore, John I bumped into John at Coinex (I think?) last year, selling old books and catalogues. I always assumed you were one and the same! Is he interested in the copper penny series, or is that only yourself? I'd once heard that one of you might even be considering a book? A definitive book is badly needed and, with a good numbering system, might even replace Peck and Bramah in auction descriptions for 1837-1860 (and perhaps even 1797 - 1860).

The set has been offered for sale on the Heritage website for quite some time now with a buy-it-now of $60,000. Sold for $13,800 back in 2004. http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=340&lotIdNo=24060 Whether it's really for sale, or just listed, I don't know. A while ago I tried to send a message through HA.com, to the seller, but never received a reply.

waves to the right of the shield differ, a bit like the two types of 1896 halfpenny really need an 1897HT with similar lighting to Bernie's 1926 Cb for a better comparison probably all these designs were kicking around the mint as rejected dies since 1894, Is it my imagination, or do both the 1897 HT and the Cb have the 'double' rim on the left hand side of the reverse? This is quite a distinct feature: Edit: In retrospect, I think the effect on the Cb is purely due to image cropping. I've also noticed that the position of Britannia's thumb on the shield appears different.

The results will be better if you Google 'Tony Clayton'

I just had a look and all they have is the 2013 edition. It still costs £17.99 What's more, it's advertised as a hardback. Wonder how THAT gets down the phoneline? I had the same problem when I downloaded a couple of books to read on holiday. I almost clicked on the 'hardback' download for £21.99, before I noticed the £4.99 'paperback' alternative! I wonder how many people have thrown money away on that? Am I missing something here? I have never downloaded a book to iTunes so I probably am, but what the smeg is the difference between a 'hardback' download and a 'paperback' download?! As I discovered, absolutely nothing but the price! All downloads should be at the lower price, but sometimes errors are made.

I just had a look and all they have is the 2013 edition. It still costs £17.99 What's more, it's advertised as a hardback. Wonder how THAT gets down the phoneline? I had the same problem when I downloaded a couple of books to read on holiday. I almost clicked on the 'hardback' download for £21.99, before I noticed the £4.99 'paperback' alternative! I wonder how many people have thrown money away on that?

So that's two more to add to David's list! Great addition Bernie. It looks like the George V section of Freeman really does need an update.

Interesting that Spink would lose interest in coins. If it's true, it must surely be a business decision? So how would others rate these main four auction areas, in terms of market size (and presumably, profitability): Stamps Coins Banknotes Medals and decorations I have always assumed that the order would be as listed above. In which case I can see no reason for moving away from coins (other than dropping the retail 'circular'). Or am I missing something?

Welcome Harry. As Rob says, unless the pennies are of extreme rarity (of which the chances are many thousands to one against) or are pre 1960s and in almost perfect condition (probably still with some original lustre), they are unlikely to be worth much more than scrap. Having said that, you could still strike lucky but you will have to invest a considerable amount of time learning and searching. To take one example, a 1903 'open 3' in normal circulated condition will fetch £50+ on eBay, whereas the standard 1903 will never sell, even for 20p. A lot of people begin with a jar of coins. Some go on to take up a new hobby!

Lovely coin and photo! It reminds me of this (which was spelt correctly on the reverse).

Likewise, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Very worn examples (almost flat washers) are commonly found and these can appear blackened with grease and dirt. Also being flat, they could perhaps be described as shiny. I think we need a picture.

That's great, thanks!

It looked like this:

I've just re-read this post and noticed that, contrary to the "about 1980" comment made by Michael Freeman, this coin was actually described in an article dated January 1972. Further, the article states that findings date back to "just before decimalisation". I am absolutely certain that the little pocket book I had in the early 70s (not 'Check your Change', the other one that I can't remember the name of) listed the variety and value then. I wish I hadn't thrown it away a few years back! Edit: I've just remembered, the book was called 'All Change', by David Nash. Does anyone have a copy?

A little more playing around with lighting angles does improve things:

I called into town and bought 3 very cheap desk lamps which I fitted with 4.5w LED bulbs (cool white - 4100K). I positioned these at 9, 12 & 3 o'clock and took a photo with my canon compact digital camera in macro setting. The left hand photo shows the result. For comparison the right hand photo was taken in daylight yesterday. I need to spend more time fiddling with the set up, but at least I can take photos when the sun isn't shining!

Nick, do you have a couple of comparative photos to post, using your set up? I'm sure they've been posted previously, so a link will do. Also, what is a CFT bulb? I can only find CFL in Google.

The lamps I've been using for about the last 2 years are the IKEA sourced "Jansjo" LED lamps. They require a little bit of diffusion (not a lot), but they have an incredibly small footprint, so you can even get them into tight working distance spaces. Here in the states they are $9.99 each -- looks like they are £10 each on your side of the pond. http://www.ikea.com/gb/en/catalog/products/00169659/ This is great Brandon. To date all my photos have been taken in daylight, but that does limit me. I may well give your set up a go using my simple compact camera (with macro mode), but one question comes to mind. Why do you only light the coin from the top/sides, albeit with 2 or 3 sources? Is that simply due to the practicality of being unable to place a source in the space taken by the tripod? If the camera was mounted from above would you also choose to have a light source at 6 o'clock? Regarding the IKEA lamps, do you know what colour temperature they provide? Presumably you could fit your own bulbs anyway. Around the house I've standardised on a warm white (2700K, I believe) but for photos a cooler (higher temperature) may look better?

As Peckris suggests, without a picture it's impossible to know what you mean. The range from extremely valuable and unique coin, to worthless, scuffed washer is a wide one. Hopefully yours lies closer to the former!

I like that! Now please explain the one year 1897 reverses! Certainly makes sense!

Sorry, it gets a little old hearing the same old thing. PCGS and NGC grade coins using the USA Sheldon 70-point scale. The letters and numbers they put on coins will not match the European/UK grading scale. For all intents and purposes there is a reasonable cross-walk between the two scales, but they will never be perfectly the same. We get that, and it's not that difficult to move beyond that. As an American collector, I understand that a UK graded gEF might "equate" to a USA graded MS62/63. That doesn't bother me. It's like complaining about different spelling of words in "Queen's English" versus American English. The two languages are still readily understood on both sides of the "pond", and it is what it is. The constant rumbling and aggressive behavio(u)r doesn't really serve any constructive purpose. Disclaimer: I am NOT a fan-boy of NGC or PCGS, but I take them for what they are. They have slabbed a lot of nice coins, and if I were to completely ignore coins in their "plastic tombs" then I would be doing myself a disservice as a serious collector. I also purchase plenty of raw coins and tokens, and know how to grade for myself. Adapt and survive -- whining about the "good ol'days" isn't terribly effective. The fact that american buyers buy TPG slabbed British coins at vastly inflated prices says to me that you should keep squandering your cash like you do because its behind an NGC or PCGS slab, other more sensible British coin buyers would buy the same coin unslabbed for quite a few 100 dollars less, those are the savvy buyers. So you go ahead and buy those slabbed ones, its up to you how you choose to blow your moneyAs Vicky stated, they are far to inconsistent It sounds like we're actually all in agreement! Whether a coin is slabbed or not, any buyer should view the coin itself and make his/her evaluation of the true variety and grade. They should purchase on this basis alone. The vagaries of the TPGs, coupled with the fact that some buyers don't check the above, ensure there are plenty of opportunities for bargains, whether from US or UK sources. Personally, it very much suits that rarer Freeman penny varieties can occasionally be found hiding in more generically labelled slabs. Long may it continue!

That looks right to me David. Thank you!

I've pinched these images from Acculator's site - as they are the same size with virtually identical illumination The rare 1922 reverse is NOT the same die as used in 1927 Strangely, Michael Freeman states this in his article: "About 1980, it was discovered that a few pennies of 1922 also exist with the normal, early, high relief large effigy paired with what is, in essence, the modified reverse of 1927-36. The border teeth are a little longer and the head of Britannia a fraction smaller, but it is, otherwise, the later reverse." From the photos you show, David, these differences are very obvious (look at the size of Britannia's head for example), and enough to warrant the reverse for 1927 being denoted 'D'. I'm surprised that Freeman decided not to do this when he suggested his catalogue re-write for 1922-27.