damian1986

I think part of what motivates collectors is having and making sense of a number of coins - rationalising what is there, referencing it against the times and context in which the coins were minted or the events they refer to. So while your questions met with a bit of cynicism there's a pleasure to be had in piecing together these modern commemoratives if you get something out of it. In 20 years (or less?) we probably won't even use coins as the medium of exchange so the fact that you can still pull them out of change is a good thing. Any negatives are firmly directed at the Royal Mint and the lack of attention given to the designs. Though there is an argument that says to limit expenditure on the modern commemorative proof and 'brilliant uncirculated' pieces as they are very expensive compared to their face value. The Royal Mint do some good things still by the way. The £20 coin (struck in silver) for £20 was one; the latest £20 is a WW1 commemorative too so would be more than worth a buy if that's where your interest lies.

Is Omnicoin more a personal thing (organising and recording what you have) for you lot or more a way of sharing what you have? The idea that people record coins and make them available to be searched is good but it'll need a larger number of members before the results become useful. I quite like what the guy did on http://www.britishcoingallery.com/ but this is only his own collection.

Yes. eBay. When you make a purchase from The Royal Mint you're not simply buying a coin, you're owning a piece of history.

Funds! To be honest that prices have only doubled in 10 years makes the prospect of buying at the top end of the market not overly daunting. The jump in prices from F to EF isn't all that huge so I don't see any value in buying a lower grade piece. The above shilling, and another currently on eBay, which is VFish at £2,750, are not even half-tempting buys - the size of the hole burned in the pocket will be smaller but the rewards disproportionately less. A VF with eye appeal at closer the 1000 mark would give me cause to think but as it is I'll happily wait. I can see why the Foley pattern would be desirable to crown collectors but don't understand how it's shot up so much. Was the Wyonin crown of 1910 (ESC382+) a Royal Mint or private pattern, because that one seems to have been consistently sought after / expensive? I do wonder with the common gold pieces whether the equivalent expenditure in silver offers more value. Richard yes the other one that I was thinking of is the gothic crown.

Thanks Rob. Naturally I'm just being bitter because I want one

My understanding is that the hoard will be valued by the Treasure Valuation Committee. It will be declared as treasure. By the Treasure Act of 1996 the owner must then offer it for sale to a museum. The museum will find the funds. So... The British museum are currently asking for sizable donations (of the order of 10s of thousands) that will go towards the cataloging and photographing of coins. Because they don't have enough money to take account of what they have. But... They'll find a few million quid to cover the purchase of a large hoard. Which... Will never be photographed and cataloged because they don't have the money. Cuckoo.

Hmmm. Just wondering what you lot think this is actually worth? For me this is only fine, and then you have to factor in the JCB work. Don't see anywhere near 4 figures. Actually on this note, what is it with the Cromwell shillings, halfcrowns and crowns? There's loads of 'em knocking about and always 3, 4, 5, 6 grand...

I do something similar in terms of what I'm collecting. Your goals are more difficult than they seem or you could effectively end up building a nice collection of hammered and milled groats. There are issues with Philip and Mary and Cromwell. If one that appeals to you for either comes up then snap it up as I for one haven't got the balls now to spend £2,000 on a shilling in a molested VF which seems to be about the going rate. So when one does slip through the net... also there's an argument for buying the most expensive / hardest to obtain first if you do intend to buy them eventually anyway, even if it means passing on 10 purchases just to get 1.

I feel bad, the designers / engravers are very talented people no doubt but all that we have here is a couple of dozen blobs. Below is how Saxony celebrated victory over the French in 1871. Maybe at the time everyone in Saxony thought oh no what another shit commemorative, but probably not. This coin photo filched from emuenzen.de.

The main issue is content management for me, things keep disappearing. Thanks for taking away the Numismatic Circulars. It is a nice coin if you are willing to ignore the reverse stress cracks. I suppose actually if I were giving serious consideration to doing ~ £4,000 on it the cracks would be problematic. These sorts of imperfections generally bother me far less with hammered than milled, though that may change.

I'll help them fix it in exchange for them pulling the upcoming Leicester 1d of William I and duly sending it my way.

It seems to me that the majority of the later milled British silver coins show some hairlines when held under angled light / viewed under high magnification and they are clearest when photographed with a soft light. These coins are not usually penalised on grade or on price. Many photos tend to mask hairlines, sometimes by using a bright light or a diffusing box to 'wash out' the metallic surfaces, and in hand these hairlines don't usually detract. Also toning has the effect of masking hairlines naturally. Should these coins be penalised or is this just par for the course? We're not talking about whizzing or rubbing marks here to be clear. I was photographing this shilling and it's a nice coin but under higher magnification the surface marks do detract. Certainly the seller's photo was much less revealing even though high-res. Appreciate your thoughts anyway.

Much much appreciated Richard! Now if everyone else can do the same for their chosen area of focus I can pick up a little bit of everything!?

Closest I've seen is this: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Scarce-1945-Britain-One-Penny-1d-Very-Good-Detailed-George-VI-Ref-326-/201051280542?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item2ecf97149e Nice eye-appeal and 'lustre' but two unfortunate digs on the obverse. I think a real nice one would be worth 30 or 40 quid. Who's got a roll of 'em?

Oooops. You may or may not have noticed ... that's a 1946 not a 1945!! Ah yes no specific date required for me here. I sold one in the past and that was probably the only one I regret letting go but I think the one I got now is from the same batch. Scott you are well up there on omnicoin just had a gander. This one goes down as one of my bargain buys at £8.50.

A couple of auctions that just came to an end on eBay... 1950 proof 1/2d nFDC = £1.46 with free postage 1915 half mark (silver) AU = £0.99 with free postage Not sure what I was expecting. Not as good as the BINs hence took the risk. The only reason I'm not hanging onto them is because I want my collection to be less random and a bit more focused, fewer pieces that I will appreciate more than a quantity of coins. I figure someone else will get more out of them than me now, different goals and appreciation. I was just hoping I wouldn't have to actually pay to move them on

Part of the reason I mentioned milled silver specifically is that I think the hairlines are exacerbated on silver coins under certain lighting. If this coin has spent say 100 years of its life wrapped in a cloth or in a felted tray, the faintest of hairlines are to be expected? Meaning that the "lightest of handling marks" - the slightly deeper hairlines visible on both photos - are the only marks worth caring about? If this were a run of the mill florin, would the slabbed photo put you off buying it?

Hey Pete here you go. I think I managed to get pretty close on colour, it's a nice brown.

I don't mind adjustment marks, I guess it depends where they are and how much adjusting had to be done Woodpecker cider eh I may have had a few of those too... we then moved onto White Lightning which brought an abrupt end to our cider-drinking careers.

Appreciate your comments. I would guess that the TPGs are well-placed to grade at this level of detail - they post frequently about the technology they have at their disposal and the techniques utilised to grade coins so I can see where this adds value to their service. It seems in practice there's still a huge element of subjectivity though so short of identifying damaged coins at the microscopic level that value isn't being realised to its fullest IMO. As a collector I don't feel I really need a surface grade, just a nice photo and anything amiss to be mentioned in the description but it's not a bad idea - they do this with the ancient coins but they come out of the ground; we have very high expectations of the milled coinage!

The photography is a tricky one - when you photograph anything else you tweak until it's as you want it to look. It seems to be the nature of photography that you capture the object in its best light. Obviously when something that is perceived to be problematic - whizzing, tooling, dents, scratches etc. - is obfuscated or intentionally buffed out it's a problem, but otherwise I think there's a lot to be said for being able to take a nice photograph that captures the coin as it would be observed in hand. If anything the Internet has, presumably, made people like me too fussy. Most coins are bought based on ridiculously high resolution images. I just pulled the below out of a mint roll of coins. So it's practically as it was when it left the mint, excepting bag marks with rubbing against other coins. The hairlines are minimal but do exist. I appreciate that minting practices were different in 1834 but still. Incidentally, this is the definition of an MS66 on the Sheldon scale: A few very light hairlines may show under magnification, or there may be one or two light scuff marks showing on frosted surfaces or in the field. The eye appeal must be above average and very pleasing for the date and mint.

Thanks chky. I usually watch out for certain key words (Schrötlingsfehler, berieben, kratzer, randfehler, justiert, ...) but the seller didn't describe the coin. I'm not complaining by the way, both nice coins, just trying to gauge where to draw the line for buying upgrades or seeking better alternatives.

Thanks Peckris. Ah yes see if the hairlines were a result of cleaning that I would consider damage. In this case I'd probably just like a nicer / less brutal picture for my records. Below is another one though. Firstly the coin as sold by a German seller, secondly the coin photographed under direct light. Definitely rubbed IMO but you wouldn't know that from the seller's original picture. The second photo is probably too honest but on the other hand I can't make my mind up as to whether the seller's original photo is very good (given that it's not an easy coin to photograph) or a bit deceiving.

No, buy it Paulus. Why is this in here rather than the my wife has bled me dry thread? Oi, you! No only joking keep that thread for the nice stuff that crops up. I think bringing wives into it is a bit unfair, despite furs being mentioned. It's the Dr. Jekyll thread. This one is the Edward Hyde.

There are a few nice EFs up for grabs http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Coin-Victorian-Penny-Young-Head-EF-1855-/381048592159 Most of the grading seems to be by consensus rather than by any analysis of the coin's wear which is why the EFs end up as UNCs and the VFs as EFs. But I can't grade for toffee so... I propose a new two-tier grading system. I was just reading some of his feedback though and I feel sorry for him actually, assuming his responses are honest as it would appear that other sellers are trying to discredit him on false grounds.