Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Coinery

Expert Grader
  • Content Count

    7,635
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    95

Posts posted by Coinery


  1. 5 hours ago, Master Jmd said:

    I'm amused that they don't have a better way to present lots like this one:

    3zJGvRB.png

    I'm also rather curious why such bundles exist on their platform in the first place. You'd think they'd reject single lots that are this varied.

    At least the listing photo shows us everything in the lot without having to read through the whole thing... (sarcasm if that wasn't clear - there is no photo).

    Absolutely ridiculous isn’t it? What a nonsense!


  2. It looks like such a perfect ‘bead’ relative to the condition of the donor coin that I’d personally be thinking it was an old ‘spatter’ of something unconnected with its minting…soldering, braising, weld, etc.?


  3. 5 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

    I'd go for a grade of AUNC on that reverse - it may in fact be UNC but the 'lustre wear' together with the fact that it's a slightly weaker strike than the obverse would make me downgrade it a little.

    Thanks, Peck, appreciate you commenting…not my natural playground at all, and all the more difficult to judge from a poor image.

    I’m looking forward to taking an in-hand photo! :)

    • Like 1

  4. Firstly, can I ask what you think the reverse grade of this coin might be (Sellers pictures, I haven’t seen it in-hand, yet)?

    The obverse looks a clear unc to me, but the lighting/lustre reflections (or not) on the reverse are making me wonder whether I might have to downgrade that expectation overall? You’ll likely have made thousands more predictions of grade from seller photos than I have, so I’d really appreciate your insights.

    Oh, and secondly, I don’t suppose anyone recognises it for a bit of provenance, perchance? The reverse, with its die-crack and ‘straight-edge’ toning at the second N of penny, through to the ship, is reasonably distinctive.

    IMG_0405.jpeg

    IMG_0403.jpeg


  5. On 1/27/2024 at 6:12 PM, VickySilver said:

    Some of the MS64 RB coins are really special; also I will try to dig out a picture of one "detailed" for a small DIE CRACK! It was an 1871 and beautiful as well....

    Why would they ‘detail’ a die-crack? Is that standard practice, or a crazy one off?


  6. 3 hours ago, pokal02 said:

    It would only mean that some of the '1551' coins could have been issued in Jan-Mar 1552.   It would still be the case that if the Southwark mint was closed in July 1551, the fine silver would all have to be Tower if the Oct 1551 date is also right.  The 1551 'tun' crowns are rarer than the 'y's, suggesting the change over (whether of mint or just mint mark) must have been Jan/Feb 1552. 

    Ah, yes, I see what you mean.

    It’s turned into a very interesting read :)

     


  7. Ah, just got a fix…it looks like there’s been some updates or other?

    If you’ve got a tab opened that’s displaying correctly, or click on the home link or pre-dec. link on the broken page, and then re-add it to your home-screen, everything should work as normal…hopefully :) 


  8. Interestingly there’s an image on the other thread that makes me see a three for the first time, and a clear rear serif of a four!

    Here’s a proposal…what about an original three, with a four inserted the following year, BUT it broke up during the insertion (bits in the red circle), making the die irreparable/useless until the next useable digit came along to cover up the mess, which could only be an eight or a nine?

    IMG_0291.jpeg

    IMG_0290.jpeg


  9. 28 minutes ago, alfnail said:

    .....and there is also this diagonal line, highlighted red

     

    1858 over 3 (or is it) protrusions Predecimal.jpg

    Yes, that’s the diagonal I was referring to. You know what, that vertical line is far too straight in your example to be anything connected with the ‘curved’ numbers. Has anyone ever considered it might be a four, and that the remaining bottom loop and part serif is nothing other than a poor repair of the  eight with an old, possibly broken punch?

    I’m sure you’ve all been over it a million times already. I guess it’s going to sit on the unidentified variety pile for some considerable time, maybe even forever?


  10. On 1/16/2024 at 10:12 AM, secret santa said:

    1751288823_1858P1516BBramah25czoom_edited.jpg.a72e9fab0d7e94027440608138ca15ad.jpg

    So what do they do, then, with the old digit ‘hole’ left on the old die, before striking in a new digit? With hammered coins the old digit is just crudely overlaid as best as is able.

    Now, the reason I ask is because, according to the lighting, I see digits at three distinct depths, the 8 at the intermediate (middle) depth, a higher (deeper on the die) bottom section of a three (but having the wrong serif when briefly looking at other 1853s), and lower (shallow on the die) diagonal stroke, extending out of the eight, not correlating with very much, except maybe a seven? 

    Was there ever a satisfactory outcome to this overdate or has it remained a mystery? 
     


  11. 27 minutes ago, Rob said:

     

    Different dies surely, the N is further away from the cross end on yours

     

     

    Yes, a different reverse die, mine’s the only reverse die of its kind I’ve found so far, with that double ring of pellets around the left half of the coin.
    By stable mate, I meant that the two coins were sold together in the same lot at the Wilkinson sale.

    I wasn’t paying attention, I thought both the tickets you supplied with the coin were yours. It wasn’t until this morning I realised one of them was W.W’s ticket :) 

    IMG_0258.jpeg

×