Leaderboard

So, following on from http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/9914-4054a-1926-penny-of-highest-rarity/, I've been trying to get my head around the 1922 and 1926 pennies seeing as both Freeman's and Gouby's works have been outdated by somewhat recent discoveries. This what I've come up with from my reading here: 1922 Gouby C+b/Freeman 3+B - the regular circulating 1922 1922 Gouby C+c/Freeman 3+C - the so-called 1927 reverse which is actually different from the 1927 obverse 1922 Gouby C+c/Freeman 3+C proof - supposedly struck for 1924 proof sets for the South African government (http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/8353-1922-penny-reverse-of-1927/?p=94427) though I haven't seen any reference to these coins or their purpose/origins in the literature. 1922 Gouby D+c/Freeman 4+C - one of Freeman's updates (http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/8353-1922-penny-reverse-of-1927/?p=93996) - anyone know where this was published? A picture was posted at a few days ago too and it appears to have circulated; seems to be the same coin posted at 1926 Gouby C+b/Freeman 3+B - regular circulating 1926 1926 Gouby D+b/Freeman 4+B - regular circulating 1926 1926 Gouby D+d/Freeman 4+C - another one of Freeman's updates (http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/8353-1922-penny-reverse-of-1927/?p=93996), about to be auctioned () 1926 Gouby D+?/Freeman 4+? - http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/8353-1922-penny-reverse-of-1927/?p=94301 - anyone know when the last sale of this was, or if there are any books/articles that make mention of it? Seems like the F192C mentioned at http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/8353-1922-penny-reverse-of-1927/?p=94328 doesn't exist, or did I get lost in that thread? Also, considering the case of the 1922 with the trident dot, Freeman says that the bronze alloy was set in 1923. Is it possible the trident dot coins are tests of the new alloy? Does anyone have one to do a ring test with, or are the different bronze alloys all similar enough that they have the same ring?

Personally I use a three year-old 14MP Olympus point and shoot with macro. As MH says above, steadiness is essential. If you're taking photos hand held you need enough light to ensure the camera exposure is fast. Or a tripod. The coins I photograph are generally toned. Easier to photograph than shiny ones I find and even then you often need to adjust the angle of the lighting to show the detail to best advantage. A lighting set up would probably be more flexible but I'm too lazy so just take lots of shots and choose the one I like best. I also take photos on a surface. But unlike Azda I find a neutral colour is better. Doesn't matter what, as long as the tone is close to that of the coin. Otherwise if I use white the camera adjusts the exposure and the coin comes out too dark and vice versa if I use a black background. Once I have the images I combine the obv and reverse and use a simple picture editor (I use Microsoft Paint) to paint in a background. Depending on whim I end up with either a black or white background. .

a tripod's always a good idea (or a steady hand), good lighting and a half decent camera

Natural daylight, my camera is a 6 year old olympus Point and click Set at the highest Macro settings, i always try and use the Same background, either Black or white, i've no complaints about how they turn out so far, i've Even used the ipad for maundy or boxed sets.

I find this article very useful: link

Hi. The 1950 you can throw in the bin although the 1951 is ok. PM me and will post you a couple of nice ones to get you started and dont want anything for them. Dont want to sound harsh and would like to get you focused on the better ones,that 1950 is horrible. Pete.

On the subject of fakes, the BNTA have just launched a website for members with user name and password protection, where known fakes are documented and shown (I assume, I haven't looked yet). Apparently users can also add fakes to the database. The information is not available to the public and this is the reason: After much thought, and consultation with many of the BNTA members, the Council decided that the best route to take with the forgeries database would be to protect the information in a “members only” section of the website. This means that the information is not shared with the public and genuine collectors are not put off from building their collections by knowledge of the quantity of that forgeries exist. The best way to battle this problem is to educate ourselves as members of the BNTA and feed this down to our clients when helping and advising them to buy coins. So, this concept boosts one of the core ideas of the BNTA : that collectors should look for the BNTA symbol when buying coins and are advised to seek out BNTA dealers when building a collection. The private nature of this information also adds value to your membership of the BNTA, with access to information that you would not be able to easily find elsewhere. I think that's a wrong decision and it seems to suggest that collectors are a bit silly and that they all really need a BNTA god to offer guidance. Many novices do need guidance, but surely the best way to battle any problem is to educate EVERYONE, not just a minority group of UK coin dealers. It would be nice if everyone was aware of the BNTA and that collectors actively looked for the BNTA symbol, but I suspect of all the coin sales on the internet in the world, less than 1% is made by a BNTA member and that nearly 100% of the coin buyers either don't know who the BNTA is, or don't really give a toss!