Peckris

What's the ship? The Golden Hind, or just a generic 19th C warship?

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. Don't think it is an 1871, possibly an 1874 with the one repunched in the wrong position (mint worker forgot he was working on a mirror image) Now bear in mind pennies are not my thing , but it looks like an altered 4 to me, the serifs on the last one are angled which are completely different to the other 1 in the date. I can also see some difference in shade where the 4 would have been, but I don't know how this would compare to genuine date spacing for this date? Overlays anyone? I think we've established that it can't possibly be a 1871 - so please let's not talk about "probably" or "don't think". It's not! Let's start from what it might be - 1874 at the earliest - and work from there. 1874. Copy it into a program where you can alter contrast and brightness. The LHS of the 4 shows up as a line parallel to the 7 and if you look carefully just on the RHS of the 1 it looks as if there are the serifs of the 4. I see that Rob, quite plainly. The thing is, how did they get the flat top to the digit, and the extra thickness to the downstroke?

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. Don't think it is an 1871, possibly an 1874 with the one repunched in the wrong position (mint worker forgot he was working on a mirror image) Now bear in mind pennies are not my thing , but it looks like an altered 4 to me, the serifs on the last one are angled which are completely different to the other 1 in the date. I can also see some difference in shade where the 4 would have been, but I don't know how this would compare to genuine date spacing for this date? Overlays anyone? I think we've established that it can't possibly be a 1871 - so please let's not talk about "probably" or "don't think". It's not! Let's start from what it might be - 1874 at the earliest - and work from there.

Plenty of A480's online (ie argos just over £80) However it gets slated on batteries and its viewfinder. The crucial thing is - has it got a genuine macro mode? It's no good for coin photos if it doesn't.

I just read a review of it that didn't even mention that it has a macro mode. I hope you're sure about that? Take it back if it doesn't, as that's the one thing you need for taking pictures of coins.

Because 99 out of every 100 people (you may find this hard to believe LOL) regard coins as mere money, or at best interesting metal discs to be defaced in a variety of interesting ways. People have split two extremely common pennies and stuck two of the different halves together for no better reason than "Hey, I've got a new lathe". When I looked through bags of pennies in the late 60s, you wouldn't believe the number of defaced items I found, from deeply machined initials and / or numbers, to serrating, heart- or other-shaped holes, or simply machining off every other letter in the legend. thank's for all the input,beleave it or not ive found another coin same date no H since I posted this Q.these coins were minted in in birmingham im sure,most had the H some diden't the coins are there and are not rare BUT are they on record, If someone produces an example that's at least a good Fine, then I'll believe the 'clogged die' theory. Until then I'm going with the 'wear or damage' scenario.

YAY. I can come out from slinking around ... until next year!

Myself, Declan and Hus all use a Canon powershot A480. It will knock you back around £60 Steve and ticks all of the above boxes. I don't use a tripod or any lighting other than natural daylight. Thanks John, I think I can stretch to £60! If no one has a better idea I'll get one next week. I'm fed up looking at me poor scans. On the other hand, you should be able to pick up a DSLR plus macro lens and still have change from a grand ....

Very, very interesting. An absolute bargain for £85.00, I'd say. Can't see it being on sale for long. It does look like a narrow date, yes. It also looks genuine. It's about as right as a WWII bomber on the moon! Without even trying to look at dies it is apparent that the second 1 is a totally different style. I had the very fortunate miss on an 1860 penny on ebay at £1200 a couple of years ago (I think it made over £2k). It appeared to be an unrecorded J + g. It now appears on page 100 of Michael Goubys book as an altered date forgery. At least this seller states he thinks it is a wrong un. Ebay is an absolute minefield and should be negotiated in a bomb suit (preferably 2) with a very good sniffer dog and detector in front of you! I was being sarcastic. If there had been any chance of it being genuine, 1) It would already have gone, 2) There would have been a lot more fanfare, higher price plus attempt at verification and 3) If it hadn't gone after that, I'd have bought it myself in a heartbeat That said, of course, somebody will buy it "as is", and probably re-sell it for more !!! Yes, the obverse is the giveaway, not appearing on pennies before 1874. The question is, what's it been altered from? That doesn't look obvious.

Genuine links to window cleaning sites and not a threepenny bit in sight - what goes on? Check the profile out, only a subtle hint of what lies beneath though! Got you! Didn't think to check the profile. Makes you wonder why those window cleaning links are genuine though - unless that's a picture taken through a window from up a ladder, and the actual purpose is to sell window cleaning ...

It may be like mine, the thumb print was on the scanner glass! Nice coin. Gorgeous. I'd live with a slight thumbprint.

Because 99 out of every 100 people (you may find this hard to believe LOL) regard coins as mere money, or at best interesting metal discs to be defaced in a variety of interesting ways. People have split two extremely common pennies and stuck two of the different halves together for no better reason than "Hey, I've got a new lathe". When I looked through bags of pennies in the late 60s, you wouldn't believe the number of defaced items I found, from deeply machined initials and / or numbers, to serrating, heart- or other-shaped holes, or simply machining off every other letter in the legend.

I hope, I pray, that it's Barca. But as a loyal Scouser I'm staying out of mental harm's way via Dr Who, Dad's Army, and Wallander.

I think both those have been known for so long they have acquired a permanent status. But certainly neither is as rare (especially the 1902) as many of the lesser-favoured bun varieties.

Genuine links to window cleaning sites and not a threepenny bit in sight - what goes on?

Given that it's not going to be worth very much, you might want to keep it as a memento - finding coppers over 200 years old while out walking is not an everyday event.

Still use my 5mx! Whats the 5mx a older prio model? Newer by a couple of years. It's black and white and can't remember anything if you take all of the batteries out. Yes, disregarding all the warnings I allowed both sets of batteries to go flat, and everything went west. I actually do have an early backup surviving but sadly that was taken before I'd done the Spink spreadsheet. I don't use it at all nowadays (it got pretty shabby, the stylus broke - but a good little machine in its day. The success of the Palm drove it out of the market. I believe they still technically live on in ARM chips and Eriksson firmware?)

Or, it could be that the H was machined away when the coin was much less worn, and evidence of the machining has also now been worn away. Just a thought.

Looking at the background, I think it's just that the subject is not quite perpendicular to the camera. I think the bottom is slightly nearer the camera than the top and given a low depth of field the top half is slight fuzzy. Yes, the background is certainly out of focus at the top corners. But on the coin itself, any 'fuzziness' is so marginal it is almost immaterial. There is no element of coin detail, tone, wear, mark or blemish that cannot be seen clearly. If I was judging that item on eBay from that photograph, I could do so without any reservation or doubt.

I'm not so sure scott - have another look at the three pepnnies above, they seem to be showing three distinct stages of wear: • The middle one shows a strong exergue with all elements from the uppepr line down to the rim still clearly visible • The bottom one shows strength everywhere EXCEPT the lower half of the date digits, and the H • The top one only shows strength in the upper exergual line and the topmost part of the date digits It seems that wear begins on the lower parts of the date and the H, then spreads to the rim+teeth thus exposing the remainder of the exergue to accelerated wear without the protection of the rim. The H on those buns is nearly always shallower than the date digits anyway, and will disappear completely before the date (which - in ghost form - is often the very last portion to disappear completely, along with the outline of Vicky's bust). You so often now see "no H" examples of many dates appearing (heralded or unheralded) on eBay. Too many perhaps to ascribe to clogged dies? Though I wouldn't dismiss the idea completely.

Looks good! Nice lighting and backdrop, looks very natural. Very slightly fuzzy and not cropped square; a small section on the left edge of the coin is cropped out. The pictures on your site seem sharper though. Interesting. I'm seeing the whole coin on my screen (the left edge flush with the left hand border). And it looks sharp too. Certainly sharp enough for coin detail purposes. Maybe you have a problem with your monitor?

I thought the cat laid it. A cat laying a turkey - now there's a thought

All bar the 1903 are around the EF level, but the 1903 is better. The images aren't high res enough to clearly see the wear, but the first point to go is the fingers on 20th century bronze. There is obvious wear on 4 of the 5, but not on the 1903. Prices - Colin is the best man for this as I'm not an ardent follower of farthings. Spink list Ed.VII farthings at about £12 each in EF, but that seems a bit optimistic and I certainly wouldn't entertain paying that much. I'd go along with Rob. The 'Mint toning' is virtually complete on all the farthings, and fully there on the 1903. I'd rate the 1903 a minimum £25 coin, the others less so, though the 1910 is (supposedly) scarce and perhaps rates £15. The others would struggle to rate £10 tbh. That's just a personal opinion.

I remember in the late 90s, when I got a Psion Series V, it had a spreadsheet app. I created a document for Spink prices and busily transcribed prices for all my collection plus many major types in all grades into it. Many hours spent in the local library! However, I did have a portable reference to carry around for a year or two... Youngsters nowadays .. if there isn't an app for it, they don't want to know. Luxury! We 'ad it tough in them days...

Supposedly one in Fair sold for over £200 in Bamford .. but that could have been a clogged die, assuming the obverse and reverse were true to the Heaton type.