jacinbox Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 A worn penny sells for £ 200http://www.ebay.com/itm/BRITISH-QUEEN-VICTORIA-VERY-RARE-039-1882-PENNY-WITH-NO-039-H-039-/201257836694?nma=true&si=405vKnNoUtgFR93mqpyRvlNavyM%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557It is not even a no H or is it? Quote
DaveG38 Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Looks to me like the whole area around the date has been lightly ground, thus removing the H. Even so, I reckon I can still see the remnants of the H. Quote
Peckris Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Looks to me like the whole area around the date has been lightly ground, thus removing the H. Even so, I reckon I can still see the remnants of the H.Looking closely at the 2 and what possibly underlies it, I'm wondering if it's been 'dropped in' over (perhaps) an 8. But then again, that would be far more work than removing the H ? Quote
Rob Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 If someone can manage to open it with a picture editor, by changing the contrast and brightness you can highlight features which are otherwise hidden. (The reverse of removing contrast to hide faults).Unfortunately I can save it but not open it with the microsoft picture editor to change these parameters, but if anyone knows a way? Quote
InforaPenny Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 This coin has the wrong obverse (obv 12, not obv 11) showing that it cannot be Freeman 112 (the only verified 1882 no H type). In other words, it has the dies of the most common 1882-H suggesting that the mintmark may have been removed...Best Regards,InforaPenny Quote
scott Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 the lighting over the area where the H should be doesnt help Quote
Rob Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 the lighting over the area where the H should be doesnt helpThat's why I said if anyone can save it and then open with a picture editor they can change the contrast which may reveal some detail. For some reason my image must corrupt when saving as it doesn't give the option to open with the editor, only firefox or word etc. This computer is on borrowed time. . Quote
Paulus Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 the lighting over the area where the H should be doesnt helpThat's why I said if anyone can save it and then open with a picture editor they can change the contrast which may reveal some detail. For some reason my image must corrupt when saving as it doesn't give the option to open with the editor, only firefox or word etc. This computer is on borrowed time. .Rob, try saving it with a different name, sometimes browsers will cache the picture and not show you the latest version Quote
Rob Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 ok, some work, some don't. The problem seems to be the ones where the rectangular box comes up in the picture. The options would imply it's a link and not a picture, despite seeing an image. I'll have to enquire about manipulating the images as the drop down options have changed since the rebuild. Quote
Prax Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Looks to me like the whole area around the date has been lightly ground, thus removing the H. Even so, I reckon I can still see the remnants of the H.Looking closely at the 2 and what possibly underlies it, I'm wondering if it's been 'dropped in' over (perhaps) an 8. But then again, that would be far more work than removing the H ?Yes I agree with clearly the last digit of a 1888 penny has been carved to look like a 2. It would be far more work but will look authentic as people will be focussed on finding the H as opposed to looking at the other possibility. Everyone is aware of the 'rubbing the H away' trick so here's a new technique that's becoming popular Quote
Prax Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 http://i.imgur.com/ekuNOjF.jpgA clear giveaway 1 Quote
jacinbox Posted January 15, 2015 Author Posted January 15, 2015 Looks like it was made to decive. Someone went to the extent of engineering the date as opposed to deleting the H.A clever try but a bogus nonetheless Quote
jelida Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) Surely no amount of 'carving' can turn an 8 into a 2? Especially as the 2 is of good form. However the 2 is considerably lower than the correctly positioned original number , the top of which is visible as demonstrated above. It seems to me that this was a worn 'normal' 1882H reverse die with a clogged H and the number 2 was re-entered somewhat lower than correct alignment. And I did see a worn 1882 no H with the 'wrong' obverse at the Birmingham Coin Fair last week, and even under a 40x magnification could see no evidence of malpractice. I dont think all of these are fakes, simply that the tiny 'H' on the die clogged on occasion.Jerry Edited January 15, 2015 by jelida Quote
davidrj Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 The 1882 Jamaica penny is the same, the catalogues list a no H variety, but I've never seen a convincing one, given the total mintage recorded was just 48,000, I doubt the RM would bother, unless they were testing their newly installed equipment on cupronickel as well as bronze blanks. a clogged die is the most likely explanation.David Quote
InforaPenny Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Fortunately a different obverse die (Obv 11) was used on the genuine no H pennies, resulting in a unique 11+M die pairing for 1882 no H pennies, making schemes for removing the H mintmark unworkable when trying to deceive knowledgeable collectors. Since Obverses 11 and 12 are easily distinguished even on very worn coins, verifying no H pennies is straightforward if you simply examine the obverse.Best Regards,InforaPenny Quote
DaveG38 Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Fortunately a different obverse die (Obv 11) was used on the genuine no H pennies, resulting in a unique 11+M die pairing for 1882 no H pennies, making schemes for removing the H mintmark unworkable when trying to deceive knowledgeable collectors. Since Obverses 11 and 12 are easily distinguished even on very worn coins, verifying no H pennies is straightforward if you simply examine the obverse.Best Regards,InforaPennyI've just been looking at Spink's photos of the Obv 11 and Obv 12 and I'm going mad trying to spot the differences, and that's on two high grade coins. What's the clincher that even works for worn specimens? Quote
Prax Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Fortunately a different obverse die (Obv 11) was used on the genuine no H pennies, resulting in a unique 11+M die pairing for 1882 no H pennies, making schemes for removing the H mintmark unworkable when trying to deceive knowledgeable collectors. Since Obverses 11 and 12 are easily distinguished even on very worn coins, verifying no H pennies is straightforward if you simply examine the obverse.Best Regards,InforaPennyI've just been looking at Spink's photos of the Obv 11 and Obv 12 and I'm going mad trying to spot the differences, and that's on two high grade coins. What's the clincher that even works for worn specimens?The B and R in BRITT will not touch, This is the clincher.The next thing to look for is the nose which will be slightly hooked with the bulge present at 20% below the bridge of the nose. Quote
Prax Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Damn meant to say R and I will not touch at their base Quote
just.me Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 Fortunately a different obverse die (Obv 11) was used on the genuine no H pennies, resulting in a unique 11+M die pairing for 1882 no H pennies, making schemes for removing the H mintmark unworkable when trying to deceive knowledgeable collectors. Since Obverses 11 and 12 are easily distinguished even on very worn coins, verifying no H pennies is straightforward if you simply examine the obverse.Best Regards,InforaPennySeptember auction at London coins had a pretty convincing no H with an obverse 12 which was ex Seabyhttp://www.londoncoins.co.uk/img.php?a=146&l=2720&f=r&s=lhttp://www.londoncoins.co.uk/img.php?a=146&l=2720&f=o&s=l Quote
PWA 1967 Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 I looked at that however anyone think that an H looks there? Quote
Prax Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 I looked at that however anyone think that an H looks there?I saw this coin in the auction and it looked like a trace of the H was to be seen. I did bid on it though Quote
PWA 1967 Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 And the 2 in the date after looking again ?.Not sure about the coin ,but might be me Quote
Coppers Posted January 15, 2015 Posted January 15, 2015 (edited) Posted 8 minutes agoPrax, on 15 Jan 2015 - 5:07 PM, said:I looked at that however anyone think that an H looks there?I saw this coin in the auction and it looked like a trace of the H was to be seen. I did bid on it though I heard the same thing from another collector.-- who did not bid on it Edited January 15, 2015 by Coppers Quote
jelida Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 From the pics there is certainly a hint of the 'H' left by the clogged die, I hope it didnt go for too much.......Jerry Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.