ozjohn

Thanks Vicky. Yes I was forgetting about the lions. Of course my comments regarding possible wear refers to the second coin which was not very clear in my first post.

Two 1914 florins I have one a NGC MS64 and the other one I brought on Ebay some time ago. Both are nice coins but I was wondering which was the better coin. I value any comments as it helps me to improve my grading skills by having a second opinion in addition countering my bias regarding ownership of the coin. My view is the NGC coin is better as there seems to be some wear on the top of the King's ear and eyebrow but this could be due to a worn die Thanks.

With the above example I think the results speak for themselves. As for the original coin and the QM disturbance of the atoms who knows as you will never know what the original was as it has already been destroyed by the toning.. All I can say is if carefully done the effect seems to be minimal. From memory I think the immersion in the Bicarb/ Al foil bath was less than 1/2 a minute with most of the original lustre being preserved. I don't think I could have wished for a better result.

Are we taking coin cleaning to a quantum mechanical level? On a serious note I have tried the process and it seems to work well. Before doing this I tried it on some worn coins as well to check the process and get some idea of how long to immerse the coins. I also took a long time to make up my mind to do this. Before and after on an NGC MS 62 encapsulated coin are shown below. I have previously posted these results. Perhaps I could have pushed the cleaning further but in accordance with my extreme caution I minimized the amount of ceaning

Rob, We are not talking about coins that have been sealed in some fashion. The coins I was referring to are ones that have been randomly put away in a draw closet etc. and rediscovered later. Your example is not typical for the treatment of most coins however a very nice coin indeed. Sword, It is possible to remove tarnish chemically by use of the Al foil bicarb. of soda method that returns the oxide and sulfides of silver back to metallic silver again therefore not removing any of the surface of the coin. As with any cleaning to be approached with caution. jeldia, I think your response to this topic is a good commonsense approach to a serious subject. In general I think a hoard of coins buried for a thousand years in a porous clay pot would be effected in some way by the environment with all of the conditions for corrosion present in the soil water , corrosive chemicals etc.No plastic sealants in those days.

As serious question about a serious subject as many coins are traded online where it is very difficult to determine if a coin has been cleaned. Also pointing out the difference on how a museum treats coins against some collectors' opinion. I think I have seen somewhere that services are offered in the US that offer conservation services which I assume include cleaning. As it happens the most common form of "cleaning" is dipping which has such minimal impact on the coin can it be considered to be cleaning? Also in my original post the decision to clean is not one to be taken lightly.

I was watching the news today concerning a hoard of medieval coins recently discovered by metal detectors in SW England. The commentary went on to say that they had been cleaned by conservators of the British Museum. Which raises an interesting question. When should a coin be cleaned and when shouldn't be cleaned? The coins when they were discovered were filthy (not unexpected as they had been buried for the best part of a thousand years) nevertheless they were cleaned by expert conservators and this action must impact on the coins in some way. Given the cleaning of these rare coins has taken place and seems to be standard practice for ancient coins why does cleaning of more modern coins attract such negative comment on theseforums given any cleaning performed is performed with minimum impact of the coin ie only dirt and ugly tarnish is removed from the coin's surface as what has occurred with this hoard. Insteadany suspicion of cleaning seems to brand a coin for life often on the flimsiest of evidence as the coin cannot be examined properly from a photo or scan. As I have said before any high grade coin George V coin that has been put aside for close to hundred years or more and probably tarnished (toned ) during this period. Sometimes it becomes so bad that it detracts from the coin and cleaningwill enhance the coin's appearance and hopefully it's value. Of course the decision to clean or not to clean is a decision not to be taken lightly and my advice would still be if in doubt then don't. I still maintain that any bright hundred year old coin has probably been cleaned at some time in that period.

ouch!

Ok amputate? In answer to Paulus . Had another look at Paulus' execlent scan. We can relax the leg's attached what I saw was the gap between the top of the lion's thigh and the body. Sorry about the scare.

I was looking at upgrading my 1917 florin with the view of upgrading it which made me look carefully of scans of the coin. When I looked at the reverse I noticed the RH leg of the Scottish lion has been decapitated. Is this a premonition of what will happen if Scotland parts from the UK. All jokes aside it there any reason for this as it seems to be a pretty definite and I wonder if there is some meaning to it.

The RM's output was also shipped out to th Empire as it was then. How these coins related to the year of minting /year of issue as they took many months to arrive at their destination. I cannot speak for other countries but the numbers issued in Australia was recorded by the Sydney, Melbourne mints. In the case of gold coins the coins were minted in Australia with mint marks for Sydney mint etc. No doubt the reverse would have been true with Australian minted gold coins going to the UK. In conclusion the minting and distribution of coins would have been a complex operation. With the date stamped on a coin agreeing with the year of issue being the least of the mint's problem. As Rob says the mint records are the only guide we have but is probably on shaky ground. As a practical test you can check Ebay listings for a particular year and do this over time can give some idea of rarity of a coin. For example for a 1913 halfcrown you do not find too many listed at any one time something I have found to be consistent over time.

Agreed.. However some coins seem to be more plentiful than the mintage figures suggest while others less so. For example I've been trying to upgrade my 1911 florin mintage 5.9 million but when I look it's easier to get a proof coin with a mintage of 15000. In fact the normal issue coins are pretty thin on the ground. In addition as this coin was the first of its type to be issued and usually more are put aside as mementos and as a result more plentiful. This is not the case with this issue. Maybe its a coincidence ?

It has been suggested that the mintage figures supplied by the RM are the actual amount of coins of that denomination that were delivered for circulation during a specific year and could contain coins from previous years mintages that were not delivered previously. I do not know how true this is but if it is the actual number of coins bearing a particular date could vary significantly from the figures provided by the RM.

What you are saying is Scotland is a drag on the rest of the UK ie they cost more than they create. Given that the Scots would be very stupid to vote to part from the UK. The only thing they have going for them is oil (prices depressed) and with the rise of electric cars likely to remain so other than spikes due to world events which is not a good basis for your economy. Also with impending Brexit and a likely customs barrier against Scotland their prospects are bleak. However nationalism has never been based on rational thought. Like they say Brexit means Brexit and independence for Scotland means independence for Scotland no support from the rest of the UK.

Typo " flat service" of course should be flat surface.

looks like the 1d., 2d., & 3d. were stored reverse exposed while the 4d. the obverse was exposed. Possibly a flat service as corrosion can be seen on the edge of all the coins as well. The coins must have been exposed to a very hostile environment It's surprising the corrosion never effected the unexposed sides of the coins. There must have been a good seal between the coins and what they were resting on. As to what caused this ? This has been recently discussed before on these forums but this seems a pretty extreme case. As for cleaning I think the coins will be badly pitted after any attempt to clean them. I'm assuming these coins were minted in 50% silver. I think they reverted to .925 silver at a later date.

If the SNP get their way you are probably looking at another hard border for a diminishing UK. IMO the best way to encourage this would be to have another Brexit referendum. If you can have another bite of the cherry why can't we have the same etc. etc.

Quite. The people voted for Brexit. The EU elections reinforced this result but the remainders still refuse to accept this. Hopefully Boris can produce if necessary a no deal Brexit. Perhaps not the ideal result but in face of EU intransigence the only possible way to meet the results of the Brexit referendum and EU elections. Given all that has happened I do not know how the UK could live with its self if it remained in the EU.

My Spink CofE 2016 catalogs an 1847 Gothic crown at EF GBP 3000. I guess it's overpriced but still a nice coins with a few minor edge knocks.

Fake coin offered as genuine. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1900-Florin-Victoria-British-Milled-Silver-Coin-Two-Shillings/123825467047?hash=item1cd492aea7:g:5SsAAOSw2OZdH2Gm

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Great-Britain-1-Florin-1918-Silver-XF-Extra-Fine/401793179018?hash=item5d8cbd5d8a:g:D~gAAOSw8w9dDnie This one IMO would find it difficult to make Fine.

I used to work for the MOV company who made the KT 66 and KT 88 vacuum tubes and have always a bit of respect for vacuum tube audio amps they were well designed and mostly based on the Williamson amp published in Wireless World in 1951 along with the Baxandall tone control and preamp. One of the early designs using control theory.. The Williamson power amp employed the "ultra linear" design that introduced extra negative feedback using taps on the primary winding of the output transformer in addition to the normal negative feedback from the output transformers primary winding back to the input. It has to be said insulated gate FETS make very good power amplifiers as they have a similar transfer characteristic to vacuum tubes as against BJTs (transistors) that have a different characteristic. As an aside I should have brought a lot of KT 88s when I was at the MOV company and sold them to vacuum tube amp makers as they are very much sought after and they mainly use Russian tubes that are inferior to the original MOV ones.

Hi Jelida, Nice place. We have nothing like it in Australia. I think the oldest European structure in Australia is probability Capt. Cooks' cottage in Fitzroy Gardens, Melbourne which was brought to Australia in the 1930s. ozjohn

Monte. Our next door neighbor's cat keeping the hot water service warm. A firm favorite around our units. Plant in my courtyard. Strophanthus gratus a source of arrow tip poison in tropical Africa.

Poinciana tree in bloom. Redcliffe, Qld. (delonix regina)