Coinery

Will be getting myself a cup of coffee and half an hour tomorrow!

Yes, that '68 is absolutely to die for, I wish it were mine! Or I wish I could afford for it to be mine!

The thing to do is look at one in the flesh rather than an image, it is surprising how different they look, and how obvious the difference is. I know there will be those debatable early strike examples, but a true proof is unmistakeable...but I used to think exactly the same thing!! Thank you all for your kind comments. I agree, it can be difficult to tell from a photo but proofs definitely have a different look and feel in the hand The 1868 above is, at least to me, very obviously different from a currency strike. In this particular case, the clincher is the copper content as currency strikes are all bronze. In some cases, though, proofs and currency strikes look identical in photos. The coin on the left is a 1964 currency strike, while the one on the right looks and feels like a proof (it also has provenance as such), though appears no different in the photo. I understand that the known 1964 proofs are all well-handled, as is this one. I need to work at capturing the essence of the proof in a photo somehow, but it's not easy! That should confuse things! They appear end on end on my phone, which gave me the chance to look at the images first, before going back to your text to check which way round they were! I had your currency and proof the wrong way round! I think it's absolutely right that experiencing the actual coins in-hand is the only way forward with proofs. You can hear the words 'specially prepared planchets,' 'even rims,' and 'this tone and that tone' for ever and a day but, the only way anyone is ever going to 'get' it, is by handling as many proofs as they can! It's comparable to dipping, and that is, you only ever really get to know a dipped coin by dipping a few yourself. The great mystery really quickly disappears once you've sat down with a box of old junk and a jar of Goddard's!

I had a coin rejected by CGS with miniscule/near-invisible traces of verdigris. In fact, it was so minimal, it was totally gone, following a light wipe of Acetone.

I can't believe how horrible my penny was under magnification, and how much verd there was in the nooks and crannies, I struggled to put it up here! Feast your eyes as, believe it or not, this is apparently an NGC MS63, complete with verd!

That's a horrible coin, worth half of £400, surely? eBay is as crazy as usual! I know it's an R&P coin, but it's not in the least bit attractive. There's got to be a better one out there for that money?

You mean like the photo below. I'm honestly not sure of the reason, but it only seems to affect the proofs. The top grade currency strikes all seem to have good lustre. It could be that because many 1950 pennies circulated in the Caribbean for a while, the sea air got to them and gave them a tone quite quickly? Possibly? I've had 3 decent 1950 currency pennies through my hands now, all with that uniform tone you can see on accumulator's penny, which is never the way you see other coins of the period tone? But isn't Accumulator's picture a proof? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick again? Yes, of course, but it's a good example of the tone I've seen on my currency pennies of the same year. I've got a few pictures to take tomorrow, I'll get an image of mine up!

You mean like the photo below. I'm honestly not sure of the reason, but it only seems to affect the proofs. The top grade currency strikes all seem to have good lustre. It could be that because many 1950 pennies circulated in the Caribbean for a while, the sea air got to them and gave them a tone quite quickly? Possibly? I've had 3 decent 1950 currency pennies through my hands now, all with that uniform tone you can see on accumulator's penny, which is never the way you see other coins of the period tone?

Many thanks for that, gents (and for all the images)! I have to admit to being thrown by it, having a 'regular' looking lustred '35! Did they do something similar with 1950? I seem to see so many top-rated coins of this year with an even brown tone?

Can anyone explain what is meant by "artificially toned, as issued," in reference to the 1934 and '35 pennies in Peck?

Many thanks, Paul, for putting this up, I would definitely have missed it otherwise! I'm going to follow it up tomorrow, sounds like a great project!

Yes, but everybody's different, and most people set their own personal parameters when it comes to collections. I doubt there are many who have every single example/die combination in the bunhead run. But it's their decision to what extent they go, and not up for criticism ~ any more than I would criticise you for your coin collecting/selling choices. You came across so strong in your two posts last night, that I wondered if you had some sort of vested interest in that particular coin. Did you ? I have to confess myself, and I feel that I can, in view of the fact I'm going to be sidestepping the forum for a while, that I can easily relate to a decision to stick to high-grades only, in view of the fact that for most people there is no need to spend large sums on washers, when there is mostly still a number of 'affordable' high-grade coins to accumulate, and I reckon most of us fall into that category! However, when/if a time ever arrives for us humbles, where we have nothing left to spend our money on to complete a collection, then I guess the mega-expensive, low-grade, filler would be a hurdle we would all have to face, and very few of us could honestly predict their actions in that situation. It must surely always seem like a mad concept to any collector to sit a Poor coin in a Top-Flight collection, when there are still numerous other coins to collect in the series? I can only speculate, but gap-filled high-class collections must still irk nearly as much as the original gap? Surely most collectors must set out having psychologically prepared themselves for the fact that a 1933 penny is not going to grace their collection in ANY grade, and equivically, surely a great many others must have done something similar with the other major rarities and, fortunately, have never stressed about it? I for one would not feel niggled at a tray of pennies that numbered 1932, 1934, I would never have attempted the series otherwise!

Absolutely agree, I have many Three-Pounders! Therein lies the difference between WANTING a coin, and WAITING for one! I'm trying to up the few EF GVI shillings I have. Rarely does ebay come up with a photo anything like good enough to see better than EF. Pictures are seldom good enough for a clear ID! My method for buying G6 UNC on eBay is: find potential UNC's, bid less than EF price (you'll win 1in 5), 1 in 10 will be an improvement on what you already have, then take a good quality photo and resell your EF's and profit a quid or two...by the time you land your genuine UNC it's free! Even cheaper than mean old Peter's purse!

Absolutely agree, I have many Three-Pounders! Therein lies the difference between WANTING a coin, and WAITING for one!

Massively so! As I say, £15 for a genuine UNC delivered is tops for me! Duplicate, sorry, pub wifi today!

Massively so! As I say, £15 for a genuine UNC delivered is tops for me! That's if I can get near one without Dave the Snipe nicking it from under my nose!

Ahh, VS & Rob, just like my 1942 farthing, yes?

Hah, I never even looked at the description, just the pictures, naturally assuming that it must have been described as a Palladium Unc to make those prices...I think £25's a fair price then! Blimey, what a price! I was on A&C's earlier, and John's got some G6 UNC shillings at half that, and they're dealer prices! Good old eBay!

Bit of an optical illusion for me, is it a raised or sunken dot?

I just had a quick check through my G6 coins and I haven't got one of those yet, but I'd certainly be hoping to pick one up for considerably less than that, £12-£15 delivered I'm hoping! From those images you couldn't even be totally sure of it being an UNC, and you'd certainly want that at that money, plus free postage and a '42 sixpence thrown in too!

That's one of the beauties of collecting coins, unlike some hobbies I can think of such as golf or footie and horse riding! However not so good if every coin that you collect is unique! You can sell horses... Ask Findus!

I really struggle with upgrades! Near impossible most times for me to make a decision between hammered improvements as, in most cases, the replacement coin, never being perfect, will be lesser in some component of the legend or bust...nightmare, as I always feel like keeping the old coin just for the perfect IZA in Elizabeth! I really, really, struggle with modern stuff (G5/G6), as then it comes down to minute spots, Christ, a rolled two of Colin's 1942 farthings around in my fingers for hours, trying to decide which was the most perfect...I probably missed an amazing Liz or bargain UNC halfcrown of G5 on the 'bay, while I was doing that, NIGHTMARE!

Sounds like a great idea. My site is really rough and ready behind the scenes, without even using CSS (style sheets). Given a bit more time I would have used these too, though. It really is a great book, and the website a fantastic resource too! Your site's great as-is! I'm regularly on it, checking out how any given coin SHOULD look!

Colin, If you have enough intelligence to navigate your way around a computer, drive a car, and read a book, you're home and dry! There is a book that talks you through the entire process of building your own website the PROPER way, using html & CSS, absolutely fantastic, and actually great fun to follow! The book is by Sitepoint and called 'build your own website the right way, using HTML and CSS,' it's by a true star, Ian Lloyd! You can visit the Sitepoint website (.com) and download a couple of the chapters for free, just to see if it floats your boat! His book is a bit like building a jigsaw puzzle, you can fill in a couple of bits, and then come back to it a couple of days later! You'll love it!

Internet was down!