US Grading vs UK Grading.....

[RLC35]

4 hours ago, coinkat said:

Does anyone think that what is next to A in HALF is a strike thru? It just looks too clean to be a gouge.  

 

It looks like a "Bag Mark", where one coin in a bag has come in contact with the reeded edge of another. It is pretty common, even on newly minted coins. 

[Cliff]

Showing my ignorance but what is a "strike thru" please?

Cliff

[ozjohn]

9 hours ago, RLC35 said:

 

It looks like a "Bag Mark", where one coin in a bag has come in contact with the reeded edge of another. It is pretty common, even on newly minted coins. 

If it was hit by another coin during the minting process I feel sorry for that coin .

[Sword]

1 hour ago, Cliff said:

Showing my ignorance but what is a "strike thru" please?

Cliff

"Strike thru" or "strike through" occurs when an object comes between the die and blank. An outline of the object is then left on the coin surface after striking. 

[Cliff]

 

37 minutes ago, Sword said:

"Strike thru" or "strike through" occurs when an object comes between the die and blank. An outline of the object is then left on the coin surface after striking. 

Thank you

Cliff

[RLC35]

5 hours ago, ozjohn said:

If it was hit by another coin during the minting process I feel sorry for that coin .

Oz, Bagmarks are made inside a bag of coins, or when they are dropped into the collection container after striking, not during the minting process itself. 

[ozjohn]

3 hours ago, RLC35 said:

Oz, Bagmarks are made inside a bag of coins, or when they are dropped into the collection container after striking, not during the minting process itself. 

This one seems a bit large to qualify as a bagmark which  IMO should be restricted to minor marks resulting from contact between coins as you describe.

As for strike thru. If you look at the coin in hand the "gouge" is brighter than the surrounding field indicating more recent damage. This probably has a bearing on the bagmark theory as well.

[DaveG38]

Curious.It looks a little like the coin has been struck very hard by another edge on, and the edge milling has resulted in an imprint of the milling in the field.

Edited February 14, 2018 by DaveG38

[RLC35]

45 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

This one seems a bit large to qualify as a bagmark which  IMO should be restricted to minor marks resulting from contact between coins as you describe.

As for strike thru. If you look at the coin in hand the "gouge" is brighter than the surrounding field indicating more recent damage. This probably has a bearing on the bagmark theory as well.

Putting the reeded edge, of a like coin, up against the mark would show if it was a bag mark or not. btw...the bag mark is usually "new" looking, since it is exposing bare metal.

[mrbadexample]

1957 half crown with bag marks:

[ozjohn]

A close up scan of the "gouge" that may help. There is certainly some similarity between the marks on the 1957 half crown and the 1912 halfcrown however the marks under the Queen's eye and the next mark to the left have the appearance of flaws in the flan as the metal appears to be lifting despite the regularity of the marks, What I would call bag marks on this coin can be seen all over the coin as small scratches and dents.

[RLC35]

38 minutes ago, ozjohn said:

A close up scan of the "gouge" that may help. There is certainly some similarity between the marks on the 1957 half crown and the 1912 halfcrown however the marks under the Queen's eye and the next mark to the left have the appearance of flaws in the flan as the metal appears to be lifting despite the regularity of the marks, What I would call bag marks on this coin can be seen all over the coin as small scratches and dents.

 

We will never know.......

[VickySilver]

The 1957 half crown shown above has clash marks from the dies coming together without planchet in between leaving details of obv.  on rev. and vice versa.These are NOT primarily bagmarks.

[Nick]

3 hours ago, VickySilver said:

The 1957 half crown shown above has clash marks from the dies coming together without planchet in between leaving details of obv.  on rev. and vice versa.These are NOT primarily bagmarks.

Sorry to disagree, but those marks on the 1957 halfcrown are classic bagmarks and not evidence of die clashing.  The main reason being that the portrait is the deepest part of the die and thus protected from clash marks.  Clash marks can only appear on the shallowest part of the die ie the fields.

[mrbadexample]

4 hours ago, VickySilver said:

The 1957 half crown shown above has clash marks from the dies coming together without planchet in between leaving details of obv.  on rev. and vice versa.These are NOT primarily bagmarks.

Not as I understand it VS. These are marks from die clashing - all the marks that can be seen are attributable to the folds in Britannia's drapery etc. transferred from the reverse. Bag marks are simply impact damage from another coin. 

I also think the mark on the 1912 half crown is a bag mark, albeit a pretty heavy one.

Edited February 15, 2018 by mrbadexample

[Peckris]

11 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

1957 half crown with bag marks:

Sorry, but what you've ringed in red are NOT  bag marks. Bag marks could be any of the scratches which you haven't ringed. The ringed sections look like delamination, post-Mint damage, or even damage caused by die damage or bits left by the previous strike. 

To repeat - bag marks are simply the kind of minor scratches and / or dinks caused by coins rubbing loosely against each other in a mint bag, hence the name.

[mrbadexample]

But you can see the marks from the reeded edge of another coin where they’ve come together. I don’t see how else these marks are caused? 

This was always my understanding of a bag mark, but I’m happy to be re-educated if I’ve misunderstood. 

 

[ozjohn]

This link may be of interest as it describes coin grading from a US perspective .http://www.coingrading.com/intro1.html  

[VickySilver]

I think the bottom of the three marked areas IS die clash as the marks appear raised, and agree the others may be delaminations but still do not IMO appear to be bag marks directly with there being either clash or peelback at QE 2 ear - that can not be a bag mark in any sort of way. This coin has plenty of other small bagmarks as well as what appears to be plenty of die polish lines throughout.

[mrbadexample]

19 minutes ago, VickySilver said:

I think the bottom of the three marked areas IS die clash as the marks appear raised, and agree the others may be delaminations but still do not IMO appear to be bag marks directly with there being either clash or peelback at QE 2 ear - that can not be a bag mark in any sort of way. This coin has plenty of other small bagmarks as well as what appears to be plenty of die polish lines throughout.

I can’t re-examine it or take more photos unfortunately - it was one I rejected as it had too many marks. For it to be die clash though, does it not have to correspond in some way with part of the opposing design, like on the penny above?

[Peckris]

4 hours ago, mrbadexample said:

But you can see the marks from the reeded edge of another coin where they’ve come together. I don’t see how else these marks are caused? 

This was always my understanding of a bag mark, but I’m happy to be re-educated if I’ve misunderstood. 

 

No, you're thinking of something else, e.g. die clash. 'Bag marks' are just what it says on the tin - newly minted coins are bagged up and sent out to banks etc. This mass rough handling of BU coins can lead to scratches (usually minor) or small dinks on the edges, but not the effect you see above which is either caused as part of the strike itself or is post-Mint damage such as delamination or deliberate act.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Peckris

[coinkat]

Good to read that there has been a vibrant discussion. As for the 1912 1/2 crown, the question of a possible strike thru was raised given the size and sharpness. I suppose it could be bag mark. It is not an MS coin so a 58 is the best day at a TPG and on the NGC side of the pond.

The 1957 1/2 crown does show evidence of die clashing at the lower area that was circled. The area around the ear looks to be a lamination issue and the area below the eye is either a bag mark or some type of post mint hit from another object. 

The Victorian copper is die clashing... Nice looking obverse.

[zookeeperz]

On 10/02/2018 at 1:40 PM, 1949threepence said:

One here

I've seen another somewhere as well, but can't recall where.

 

 

£90 registration still apply? 

[zookeeperz]

LCGS would body bag that. I saw one on ebay beautiful gothic florin with a really small dig on the cheek the rest of the coin was flawless. They details graded it as field damage . I have also seen a few rarities wrongly attributed and this seems to be a common failing for NGC and PCGS but that's a good thing for buyers

 

[Sword]

53 minutes ago, zookeeperz said:

LCGS would body bag that. I saw one on ebay beautiful gothic florin with a really small dig on the cheek the rest of the coin was flawless. They details graded it as field damage . I have also seen a few rarities wrongly attributed and this seems to be a common failing for NGC and PCGS but that's a good thing for buyers

 

I am rather inclined to think LCGS might not body bag it especially if it is own of their own coins. I am not taking a cheap shot at LCGS but I think one can justify giving a numeric grade in this case. The placement of the mark is very important in my view. A smaller mark on a focal area like the cheek is a lot more distracting than this one which is in the field near the edge.