Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Nordle11

Moderator
  • Posts

    2,852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    66

Posts posted by Nordle11

  1. 4 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

    No, not at all. I agree with you :)

    Not sure about the scientifics of pitting. I'd imagine it is a specific response to a given environmental factor - possibly water. Once that factor is removed via placing the coin in a warm, dry setting, there would be no further spread.  But not sure. Maybe somebody else can fill us in on this one?    

    Makes sense, not sure if it's the sort of thing that you'd 'treat' as such or like you say just removed from the bad situation.

    yes, somebody help us please B)

  2. 11 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

    I don't have one Pete, and it is something I will eventually turn my attention to. But it isn't a priority at this stage of the game. Thanks for asking.

    Incidentally, talking about 1897 in general, anybody noticed this really nice Freeman 147 at the imminent LCA?   

    I'd seen that one Mike but looks to be some pitting near the E in ONE. Can't really tell from pictures though would need to verify in hand.

  3. A little bit too much glare for me, it's saturating the details of the coin so it's hard to ascertain a grade.

    I'd try bumping up to f11 and 1/125 or something near that to kill a little bit of the light, or move the LEDs around a bit and play with it to see how it comes out.

    The colour of your light might help too, I find the white hues bring out silver better. Looks like you might already have them though..

    Have you seen Brandon's post on photographing coins? That helped me a lot.

     

  4. Just now, bhx7 said:

    I have been doing a massive survey of modern pennies. Friends and family just keep dropping them off. So far I have about £70 worth and anoth £40 coming. Only portcullis types, so 1971-2008. Kneck and shoulder are killing me but enjoying it and finding lots of interesting things. Will post results and info once its all finished being collated.

    Is it an error survey? 

  5. 37 minutes ago, bhx7 said:

    Just a quick photo of the coin I am talking about. Not sure about any "blakesley effect" on this though.

    I don't think it's enough metal being pulled from elsewhere, could be wrong though. Normally it's is used to describe the effect on clipped planchets, but it's pretty much the same thing.

  6. 4 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

    Think he tells fibs too: "I have never seen an error close to this on this penny series"

    What about the other 3 then? :rolleyes:

    :ph34r:

     

    I basically typed the description for him too;

     

    "It would be called a 'retained rim cud', like you say it arises from problematic dies. You also have quite a clear blakesley effect, in 2 separate places. The weak areas are caused by the die pulling all that metal into the cud, causing the areas directly opposite to lose details. "

     

    Yet he decided to go with;

     

    "Reverse at 4 o’clock has a die flaw going through the “Y” & the field is raised to the level with the top of the “NY”
    Obverse has extra metal at 4 o’clock with a die crack going from the top of it almost to the Queens chin, 
    & at 3 o’clock the extra metal is level with the  “EG”
    Not sure what would cause it unless the die fractured; the weight is 9.4g & is aUNC"

     

    I feel like, what was the point in posting in the forum? :blink:

     

    • Like 1
  7.  

     

    Ancient Coins

     

    Auctions

     

    Coin Dealers

     

    Coin Detecting

     

    Ebay

     

    Error Coins

     

    Foreign Coins

     

    Forgeries

     

    General

     

    Grading

     

    Hammered Coins

     

    Medals

     

    Paper Money

     

    Price Guides

     

     

    • Like 7
  8. 6 minutes ago, IanB said:

           £100 BIN      

    It's always nice to help others with value and information etc, then we get ignored once they get their answer, with not even a courtesy note to say that the coins are up for sale (even though multiple people expressed interest in buying them).

    I think your marketing techniques are a bit askew, Suffolk Coins ;) needless to say, you lost at least one bid with me.

    • Like 1
  9. 4 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

    Its on the TPG thread   CGS penny        3rd Jan 2015.

    Well Prax pretty much sums it up in that thread;

     

    Quote

    If I am not mistaken I might have had this coin graded (because I graded a 1882 penny which was in similar grade and there are only 2 more of this date graded). I sold this when in 2009 I quit pennies and sold a huge part of my collection to invest the proceeds in bullion. The point to stress is that this coin and a 1861 6 over 8 that I had graded at pretty much the same time were pretty run down when I bought them. Both had verdigris and they both graded (albeit at very low levels). Back then verdigris was not a problem, this is going back a good 5 or 6 years, it was more about establishing CGS as a brand. I would doubt if these would grade if you took them to CGS for grading today. To give you an idea back then the 2 coins graded in less than 3 weeks and I gave 40 odd pennies for grading. 20 for an encapsulation only service which cost £5. I don't think they have an encapsulation only service anymore. It gives you an idea of where CGS was at back then.

     

  10. 9 hours ago, das1979p said:

    Thanks for the help. The restoration certainly looks impressive.

    I have no intention of selling them. I have a small collection that is slowly growing and these came up in a local auction and caught my eye. I'm sure that there will always be evidence of the mounting, I just wanted them to become coins again.

    Do a bit of googling in that case, a jeweller should be able to remove the mounts and excess solder, it just won't be as pretty as a fully restored coin. Will be cheaper and much quicker though.

×
×
  • Create New...