bystro!!

continued... That went before it should have... I double-click on the thumbnail pic and it comes up in glorious gigantiscope, filling the screen. If I drag it off here and onto the main screen, I can compare two reference pics side by side in enormous detail. I must master the art of posting pics here, because yesterday I came across a 1973 1/2 p which I'd like to share with the experts and which has on the reverse top left quadrant what seems to be part of the bottom left quadrant of a 1p with the dangling chains. Either this is a Mint error or someone VERY skilled at metalwork has been playing at silly b******s. But that is for a new post when I can suss out how to do that.

Hi. Thanks for the tips. So 113 and 109. I use a mac so I don't know whether it makes a difference viewing the pics. I double-click on the thumnail pic and comes up in glorious gigantiscope, filling the screen. If I drag it off here and onto the main screen,

Thanks for the explanation. I'm grateful for the assistance. It's just about clear to my aged eyes regarding the bead to the border, when I have the two pictures side by side, less so bead to letter. Far more of a challenge with a coin in the hand. Perhaps I should try to take a good photo to check. On rev 2 you quote 108 beads. As the beads seemed a little smaller, I thought there might be more than 108. I make it 113. Does this mean there is a 108 bead border, a 109 and a 113 ?

Hi. Thanks so much for the postings of the 1p. I'm very grateful. The pointings don't cause any problems now. Anyone any tips regarding the wide gaps and narrow gaps? Any illustrations of those available on the net, does anyone know please?

Hi. I'm new to posting but a regular reader. Any chance of an illustration of the 2000 1p please? I'm having problems seeing what constitutes a wide gap and a narrow gap. Am I right in thinking that your type 1 (and 2) has the first stroke of the N of ONE pointing to a GAP whereas type 3 has it pointing to the right hand side of a BEAD?