DrLarry
-
Posts
1,765 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
45
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Everything posted by DrLarry
-
I take back that statement about all obverse 6 's have that flaw on the C just looking through my 62's found one that has the colon flaw but no c flaw -
yes I agree it is always present ....I suppose it's another one where I ask why?
-
yes I agree but that does not explain why there are a number of variant overpunches why do to all the hassle of repunching letters and leave the flaw each time you prepare a new set of dies ....or are you saying that the flaw was not seen and corrected ? if the same die was used as the core why would some have the flaw and others no flaw at all ....if the flaw is the prominent feature that shows us obverse 6 if it is not there is it an obverse 6 if some like the 67 do not seem to show it surely it should be referred to as another die?
-
thank you for showing me your VIGTORIA I have searched in vain for one and it is lovely to see it would you be able to post the reverse image for me I want to be able to see the pattern also the obverse if you do not mind. That is a special privilege thanks
-
there in lays another strange thing the C of VICTORIA always seems to have a small piece of metal midway on some samples I have examined the remnant of the G can be clearly seen as scars suggesting naturally that the G was cut away why was the small flaw left to remain as a small metal lump?
-
as we have just said all my 67's do not have the flaw in others 62 to 73 the shape and form of the flaw and the colon vary
-
well exactly that is my issue with it why would you keep making the same flaw. Looking at where it is and the number of times we lose sections of the inner circle and colons is it possible by removing it you would weaken the die? Once the reversed hole cut (flaw) is made it is not possible to fill the "hole" the only way would be to grind down the whole section and start again. what confuses me is why keep cutting the hole/flaw on the die that you make each year surely a flaw would make the die more unstable as it connects to the inner circle. Well it has always confused me at least these past four years. Quote Edit this is from the original posting That is interesting were dies sent around the world ? once the other mints were established and prior to individual country coins I suppose if the mint existed as in Australia it would be a great deal easier to mint the coins at source. When was the Sydney or melbourne mint established? I see in the 1870's they are minting Sov's. The Canadian mint issued specific currency was "british" coinage used as currency alongside country specific coinage in later times?
-
ok thanks ..does that mean the master die survives through all the years and dies are cut from it in batch? No they would have had to have been cut from it each year as needed I suppose...sorry I wasn't saying no to your idea I just think out loud and type, I have a rule of leaving "alive" any thoughts LOL. I think I need to understand this die cutting business a bit better, it seems to be a very confusing aspect of my problem. Although I do not think "the pattern" I see is imposed from the die per se if it did the same pattern would always be in the same place, which is not the case. So it would suggest that the pattern (if it exists at all!!!) is etched in either at the planchet blank stage randomly or imposed upon the rolled flat rods before the planchets are cut through some kind of inking and acid etching /cleaning process. I think I am right in that often blanks are cleaned with acid and alkali washes ???
-
I posted a question on the design and aesthetic in bronze Victorian pennies which I would like to open a little. Obverse 6 is a common obverse in pennies from 1861 to 1874 in fact it is maybe the most common obverse, and so it seems safe to assume the obverse was copied over and over again to accompany a range of reverses. Yet there is a puzzle that I have mused over for a while and would be grateful for your thoughts. One of the characteristic ways to identify the obverse is the flaw on the last colon after FD why would the flaw be copied over and over again? Whilst the flaw is copied I have found a variety of legend alterations and corrections throughout this time span of 14 years of penny manufacture. To me this is confusing as much as the flaw is small on a tiny part of the design why would it not be corrected ? is it that the Mint did not care about it? Does it really matter? can it tell us anything about the history of the die? I know I bore you all with my questions but it seems a little strange and I would be grateful for any reasoning. Larry
-
There are several types of 1863 , one variety has an open 3 at the base of the loop of the 3 the gap is very wide most , if you look have a closed tighter loop these are very rare though I am afraid i have only ever found two in four years. the other 1863's that are also rare have a small number between the 8 and the 6 a die number these are also pretty rare. A normal 63 in good condition wont sell for much more than £100 and you can readily pick up very fine examples for £20 or less. in fine condition about £5. Your dealer may well have been talking about one of the very rare varieties in good condition. When I was researching the 63 I collected about 100 in pretty good condition and I doubt I spent much more than £300 in total. I hope that helps Larry
-
The only way to change things is to act as a collective. I think that misalignments are vitally important when you put them in relation to alterations in other design aspects like the inner circle or lettering sometimes I feel they clearly show that a die may have been reused from a pattern or some lost design. If nothing else it makes us question the quality controls of the mint it also gives us a very human viewpoint someone bungled their job for that days work tried to hide it? the supervisor missed it? working conditions at the time and the relative value in time and effort to resolve these problems. It is not just in the silver or copper department look at how many errors there are in Victorian Sovereigns.
-
it seems to depend who finds it. An accident is an error that R over the lower R should be clearly in my book an example of variety if there are several examples. As I have said before these selective processes that lead to legend errors seem flawed in my opinion. If there has been remodelling of a letter either as a smaller type overprinted by a larger type or a change in the style of the legend which clearly shows historic changes then we dismiss an essential part of the history of a coins "development" for me this is an anathema of being a good collector, it is a duty as custodian of history to understand this mechanism of minting from start to finish. To me I find it ridiculous if an error occurred it is not noted, notwithstanding this position of inconvenience that the "variety" imposes that we have to have a book the size of an encyclopedia to note them all there is a responsibility for future generation to ensure the information it clearly collected so that someone can use the data to resolve a question. I have said before and I will say it again. If we find an error list it in some online system , force everyone to relook at their own examples, and build up a picture of the number of each type in existence around the world in collections. It is not good enough to say an error is a variety only if it is a mistake like a B over an R. Even if we do list these new varieties a pattern (data) may arise from them which may make us look differently at coining in a certain period.
-
I realise I have broken a cardinal rule..namely to involve and include, a forum must be a place of gathering information. So I will start again, after a nice week touring the Galloway coast and the lakes painting I return with renewed vigour to my favourite topic. But rather than ask you to see as I see after 3 years I will try gather your opinions and ask that you do just one thing: to look with great care before you respond. In 2015 I noticed the faces of "an animal" or two "behind" the surface design on coins. I pursued a line of investigation which has allowed me, after a great deal of work, to see clearly for myself what these patterns are. THey are complex and I would like to ask those of you with time and inclination to help understand rather than just see if these patterns exist and if so what is the purpose and most importantly how could they have been "imposed" on coins since at least the late 17thC and likely earlier. I initially saw it in Bronze pennies but they are the tip of the iceberg. I have a number of avenues ..theories but I need keen observers to add to and develop ideas. I am searching for a team of amature researchers. I have no desire other than to make sense of the medium "coin face" and better understanding of the coins we all love. My tools are simple a microscope, my collection, and a fine sable brush. Although I do have many years experience with pattern recognition I do not think this is a prerequisite for discovery. At the heart of this idea is the very essence of a coin which is wrapped up in the idea of the "state" its economy and religion and key to it is the sacred relationship between the monarch and christianity. I should be clear that I am in no way religious but I do not deny the importance of the relationship KING:STATE:GOD and have to go where the answers may lay rather than ignoring I must acknowledge this triad. Transmogrification is I think key to this idea: a design that if viewed in a particular way can be a number of different forms, in the case of coins the monarchs head as an example of head of state, primary servant of God in the state, protector and carer yet must show humility to succeed. Could anyone who has an interest in mystery; solving puzzles; love of coins; history; metallurgy; alchemy (chemistry); design and art please get involved. I am more than happy to accept that if we do not solve this in a year I will deem myself totally mad and stop looking after which apart from a book about my descent into madness you will hear nothing more from me on the subject. However if we solve this riddle (as I see it!) we may uncover a beautiful aspect of coining design and history that just might make it a bit more interesting for new collectors. I am not Dan Brown, there is no Da Vinci code but he may play a part, who knows. I do not have the answers but we might be able to get them together. Many thanks Larry
- 99 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- marks on coins
- incurse lines
- (and 15 more)
-
It's happened to me in this country too even sending a coin special delivery royal mail would not even accept responsibility for the loss they used the coin in a box story saying that the coin was not in a box. It arrived having been sliced open and stuck back Down £250 lost.
-
Thank you for your help I suppose it is a sensitive process even if simple to those stoking the mix. In igneous petrology we use similar phase diagrams to understand the crystallisation of a magma it is always affected by pressure, temperature and impurities especially gases in the mix and metal alloys must be affected by the impurities I assume. I never really fully understand the Straw process. Thanks
- 3 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- william iii
- anne
- (and 11 more)
-
Could anyone please give me a quick explanation of the manufacture of early milled silver? I have read some of the strawing process which suggests that some of the black flow lines in the early silver coins are the result of putting the hot planchets once die pressed onto to damp straw. Were the planchets hot when introduced to the press? there are some interesting old images of the milling process but I cannot find out the exact process, or just have not looked hard enough. I have read the books on the changes that Sir Isaac newton seemed to have some responsibility for when keeper of the mint but there is not a lot of detail. I am particularly interested in the later 17th C and early 18th C although as I see the same in GII coins up to mid 18th C. Some help please. THanks
-
Help for the digitally challenged please
DrLarry replied to Rob's topic in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
i did the exact same thing -
I think it is a little disingenuous to say it is "shite" some of the rarer Machine's mills non currency types even in that state are of both historic interest and worth more than a gold coin of similar size. Well if you are an American that collects them. I love evasion coins what better example than the people taking charge of the small change when a government refuses to mint coins.
-
he must have a doppelganger.....he is missed
-
Oh I just get a sharp flat screwdriver or a chisel and if you can begin to prize open one corner they usually eventually break. I have a few I have kept ones that are readily counterfeited as I say my gothic and a couple of Spanish countermarked Dollars and Half dollars from G III. I have no desire to handle them that much so leave them secured.
-
and of course they often get it wrong, based in the US many of the larger companies workers experts seem to get very confused over our coinage. A couple of years ago I eagerly awaited the arrival of an 1837 penny which was in wonderful condition I only saw the images without a scale and I think it was one of the the first times I had purchased a slab. It arrived and was of course a half penny. The dealer I purchased it from was adamant that it was a penny I had to jump through a number of hoops imaging it along side a slabbed penny. When a piece of plastic control the mind and we relinquish the questioning of something to experts without verification I think we might end up in a bit of a mess. Mind you on some rare coins like the gothic crown I can see the point. but such cases are rare. I smash mine out of the plastic the moment they arrive.
-
I don't know enough about the French indo China coins I was however quite shocked when I ordered some 1852"shillings from one of these fake coin sites they look incredibly authentic although the "ring" is wrong and there is a flaw on the right side and an expert would be able to gauge the milling reeding is wrong. Everything else felt pretty good or bad. I do find it sad that it takes the joy out of collecting for novice collectors once bitten twice shy. As if the chances of a new generation of collectors is not slim enough this rather nails the coffin shut.
-
where did you see all that rubbish advertised? yes I agree the pennies do look authentic if a little "green" around the edges
-
yes I see that and perhaps in that issue of the $$$$ preoccupation with the value is the central problem. It is nice to look at coins as an investment but they rarely are likely to make anyone that rich and yet still money and value is at the core of the problem as it prevents in some ways the academic interest taking charge of collecting. Personally I think we lose out on some important history when we effectively barr people from identifying aspects of their coins whether that is altered lettering, or designs. Even that somewhat frivolous posting on the lumps of metal and the sinking ship in the 1806 half penny give us some clues about the history of the minting in the SOHO coins. If nothing else the impact of the environment within the soho mint maybe. Boulton himself refers to the issue of rusted dies and the problems of the minting process in the references to the condition the early planchets arrived at the die presses and hence had to introduce some alternative approaches to resolve the problem. There is no doubt the steam driven process caused an atmosphere where rusting and damage to steel dies was a major problem bearing in mind the rate of production and urgency to deliver contracts on time and to a uniform standard quality. So whilst I would recognise that the "individual" might be driven by his or her pocket in making choices about value that remains a choice they make. We should all pass any references with a sceptical eye, that is the duty of anyone. If anyone is naive enough not to do so or to take an action swayed by such "fake news" has only themselves to blame if in the saleroom their rarity does not reach the price they expect. there is a subtle line between presenting evidence for peer review and presenting fake information it is important to create an environment that allows new findings to reach as many "experts" as possible to evaluate and follow up on ideas that change perspective.