Nick

Assuming that the camera is in a fixed position between shots, you can replace the coin with something easy to autofocus on (eg printed text) to establish the focus, then turn off autofocus. That should fix any blurring due to difficulty of autofocus. A dull and lifeless appearance is going to be due to lighting. Try a brighter light further away from the subject, but you may have to experiment.

As a cynic, I believe that his twitter comments and the HMRC court case are not unconnected. By demonstrating that he is able to tweet freely, he is seeking to show that he is different from a 'normal' BBC employee and that he is entitled to have his salary paid to his personal service company, thus saving large amounts of tax. I also believe that the BBC will not take any action against him, as they also benefit from him being classed as a non-employee by not having to pay employer NI contributions.

Every other BBC employee manages to navigate this 'minefield' successfully (mostly), so it can't be that difficult.

Because it is the national broadcaster that we are forced to pay for, on the basis that it stays impartial.

I've never seen an 1887 Gothic florin that wasn't 46 arcs, but that doesn't mean that there aren't any. It's always a possibility when an obverse or reverse changes design for a mule to exist.

... and the cabin boy was called Tom, not Roger!!

No. Looks to be just 5 coins with Charles III obverse. https://www.royalmint.com/annual-sets/2023/

Another interesting video from the US about the July 2022 weather statistics produced by NOAA. The most interesting bit starts about 7 minutes in.

Stumbled across an interesting article on the subject.

Very telling.

The slab is definitely fake. Can't have two different slabbed coins with the same PCGS number.

One of my favorite memes.

1892, 2D.

1891, 2+D.

1890, 2+E.

1889, 2+D.

1889, 2+C.

1889, 2+A, not in Davies.

1889, 1+C, Davies 1164.

1888, 1+A, 1 over 1, not in Davies.

1888, 1+B, Davies 1162.

1888, 1+A, Davies 1161.

1887, 1+A, Davies 1160.

In response to a message from a forum member, I am posting the images I have for the non-withdrawn type sixpences 1887-1892.

I had both types in my collection that I sold last year. Here's a picture of both reverses (scarcer small date on right):