mint_mark

You are dead right! I have one hammered penny in my collection (Edward I, common to you ) and the reason I bought it was because it was the only one I ever saw where I could read the writing!! I'm pretty sure it's VF because it's not as good as hoard coins in museums but there's not much wear. I often look at hammered... would love to buy a groat for example... but when I see what's on offer, with clipped flans, cracks, creases and very weak strikes... I just can't bring myself to spend money on those. Now, I realise a complete centered example on a full flan is asking a lot, but surely that should be the standard against which others are graded. Are you saying your Stephen is VF becuase it is one of the best that survived or because they were all not much better when they were made (as far as we can tell)?

Oh no I can see it now... in the future the Royal Mint will release their latest weekly commemorative coin (10000th episode of EastEnders) in platinum, gold, sterling silver and for the first time, the comforting warmth of real copper... just £5.99 in a presentation folder, and also included in the deluxe "History of Copper Coins" boxed set, including a genuine British solid copper coin that has actually been used by real Victorians!

Well, that collectors coins book has lots of varieties in it... or maybe I should say had, since my latest edition is 1987 I'm sure it's just as good now though... Anyway, it mentions lots of "pointings", where the extent of the variety is whether letters in the legend point to beads in the rim or betwen them, much like the 10ps. I remember checking through loads of shillings... I really tried to get interested in these, honest, but it just doesn't do it for me. I mean, an actual design change is one thing, but minor differences in the way dies for the same coin are engraved... While we're here, does anyone know how these pointing varieties happen? I understand that dies are engraved by machine, controlled by an operator tracing over a large version of the design with a stylus. So, are the border beads on the large version being traced? Or are they on a ready made ring and stamped into the die afterwards (in which case it is easy to see how the differences occur) Interesting, but still not interesting enough for me to collect...

One of the most important things I have picked up in my journey from beginner to, umm, enthusiast is this... grading a particular design of coin becomes much easier once you have seem a perfect example. Put another way, you can't judge how much of a design is worn away until you know what was there when it was new. Of course, it implies that older coins are harder to grade because we are less likely to have seen perfect examples to compare against, and as Chris and Sylvester point out the technology was such that even new coins had considerable variation in quality. There, something for you all to ponder... obvious really when I read it back

Chris is right Master JMD. Lustre depends on environmental conditions, but the grade depends only on wear. You can have unc without lustre, and EF with lots of lustre. And, if a coin has been cleaned, you can have VF or less with apparent lustre... so don't go relying on that lustre for your grading!

Yes, go back and regrade... I nearly always change my mind a long while later, and almost always downwards... it usually has to be long enough for me to forget how much I paid! Lustrous 1806? Are you sure it hasn't been cleaned or dipped in something Master? Sounds too good to be true...

Oli, when you get to the early 1920s I reckon it's worth getting more picky... I've been disappointed by how weakly struck many of them are around then, espacially around Britannia's shoulder... try and hold out for some sharp ones!

Tiny, isn't it... do you have a magnifier?

I quite like the table actually... best thing in this thread! Yes, a sovereign is a pound. Your table reminded me of a little card my dad gave me from decimalisation... it's one of those you tilt and see different things written on it. It has a grid showing all amounts in pennies up to 10/- and then in shillings up to 20/-... then, when you tilt it, they all change to their decimal equivalents, to the nearest half penny. My best decimalisation memento though is a card game called Snip Snap (the decimal currency game). It's basically snap, but half the cards show old coins and half the cards show new coins... "laugh and learn as you play" it says

Even if he wasn't a Persian?

Hmmm, I think you should think more about lustre and wear. I used to assume that full lustre implies unc, but it doesn't. And certainly unc doesn't require lustre. For dark farthings, any wear shows up as lighter patches... usually pretty easy to spot. Check Britannia's hand holding the trident, her helmet and thigh. For the obverse look for hair, eyebrow and top of the ear. And for George V the end of his moustache... I find these easier to grade from a picture than the bright farthings. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between a streak in the lustre and a scratch or wear. Also, an unc dark farthing has a wonderful sheen... either that or it's been dipped in oil :/

And a couple more... Adjustment marks, Brockage

Something about coin / up-down and medal / up-up rotation / alignment / orientation. There are so many names for it, but I don't think I found in there

Here's another bit then... these coins were all made by casting. I saw some moulds in the British Museum once... they poured liquid metal in and made about 20 coins at a time. Then they have to cut the coins apart and file off the sprues, but sometimes they dig up whole sets still attached to each other.

I've never heard of coin tweezers! Do they have little rubber grippy bits on the end? I hold them between my finger and thumb, and over a soft surface just in case

...and that was the first year they made dedicated Australian coins, and of course the only year with king Edward VII. Before then I think they used a mixture of English coins and their own tokens when there were shortages. Similar situaiton in New Zealand. The tokens are all very collectable.

And Iceland, although with a different spelling. All their coins were legal tender in each other's countries from 1874... one of the earlier experiments with monetary union before the Euro.

Chris, that's a perfect camera for coins... I have a coolpix 950, the earlier model. Apart from the amazing macro focussing one of the best features is the twist in half design of the body. You can attach the camera to a small desktop tripod and then the lens can point down at the coin. I made a small pedestal out of a box and some black velvet. Lighting is important... you have to take a few pictures of each coin with light from different directions and then pick the best. Here are some top tips from me Use macro mode (obviously), but zoom the lens out until the indicator goes green, showing the lens is in the optimum position for focussing. Use aperture priority with a small aperture (and therefore a longer exposure). You're on a tripod so you don't have to worry about movement... this means you can get away with less intense light and gives a more uniform exposure. Before each session use a sheet of white paper and the custom white balance feature. This helps get the colours right whatever the colour of the light you are using. I use an angle poise desk lamp with an energy saving bulb... surprisingly yellow! Only use the picture resolution you need... 640x480 is enough for my ebay listings. For bright coins (like silver) set some exposure compensation (eg +1). This can help capture lustre and eases the bright object on a dark background problem. Finally, when you press the shutter button don't hold it halfway down for autofocus first. When you fully depress it you can't fail to move the camera as the picture is taken. I just press it all the way at once, then while the it is autofocussing my hand is away and the camera stops moving. By the time the picture is taken everything is still... or it may be that the 990 can do timer mode with macro, but the 950 can't. The only downside is that the photos can show up every little defect on a coin... you might find yourself undergrading Anyway, it is worth persevering with this camera... it can take amazing pictures. I have photographed tiny mint marks on coins all the way up to pictures of the moon (through a small pair of binoculars... a crater even showed up!)

Alright, 10c 1854K is the only one with a value... my book (published 2001 I think) says US$20 for VF. I'd have to concur with Oli and say that EF seems a bit optimistic from the picture, given the dark mark, two edge knocks and is that some verdigris at one o'clock? The book says $40 for XF, and XF isn't the same as EF... but that's another discussion that I don't really feel qualified to offer an opinion on. Barre was the engraver of the portrait...

And countries! Modern commemorative coins are only worth anything in the best condition, and then usually not much. Older coins can be worth more, especially if they are scarce dates and mints, but as usual with coins it is the condition that has the greatest effect on value. At least they will be worth the silver!

Seems like you need to buy yourself a coin catalogue master JMD! These are worth next to nothing in relatively low grade. For the Napoleon III coins there is a mint mark (small letter or letters) below the eagle, and some of those can be scarce with certain dates, but it would have to be a very scarce one to be worth anything in low grade. Can't make them out for certain in your pictures... Also, you have your obverse and reverse the wrong way round Obverse is heads.

It's a 100 mon coin fom Japan. The book says 1835 to 1870 (when western style coins were introduced). I think these are quite common (book says US$12.50 in XF), but there are some scarcer types from the provinces. I've always wanted one but not got around to it yet. I do have a small 1 bu coin though, which is like a chunky little rectangle of silver!

Newton

Rocket

Pilgrim's Hatch. Lived there until I left for university... How about you?