Peckris

I notice he hasn't adjusted the starting bid price!!! Still, as he says, there are plenty of idiots out there.

I don't know whether this is a breach of protocol, but I thought I would say that I have a couple of Unc 1944s for sale and one GEF that avoided the toning process. How much lustre on the 44 escapee? And how much are you asking? (You can DM me if you'd rather not discuss it in open forum).

Me too. So far so good, but I haven't bought an enormous number of items.

Not very often you get a Mag helping a Mackem Bl00dy Mackems! Filched a draw at Anfield on Saturday. Still, the look on their faces when our first "goal" went in made up for all the beachballs of last season.

That would appear to be the halfpenny (it's nearly the size of an old penny, but much thicker, right?). Yours would grade - edge knocks aside - as a clear VF, maybe a bit better. Value around £25, give or take. It was the first official halfpenny for over 20 years, and the first to be minted using Boulton's new machinery. The price of copper saw it reduced in size in 1806, which was a very large issue and much commoner than the 1799. I personally love the design, it's a very handsome coin especially in top grades.

I STILL have my AUnc 1944 bought from Peter Ireland in Blackpool in 1979. That's how few I see. (It would grade Unc these days - and it has lovely dark chocolate toning). They aren't easy, nor are truly BU 1940s. 1946s can be surprisingly tricky too, especially when you look at their catalogue value.

Thanks az! Nice little group of buns. The 1870 is possibly not quite as good as mine, so that's nice to see it went for £127 - I thought the 1869 was a bit overbid though. It was nice but it wasn't THAT nice. The reverse looked quite dirty.

Nice! You got one without Mint darkening. That adds to its value (you won't retire on it, but 1944s go for about £25, as a guide).

You have! That's about exactly what is needed. Um ... is there a particular reason you haven't mentioned Edward VII florins?

One extreme to another LOL. Well, although a bit small, those are easier to see. It looks like a Middle Eastern or N African coin? The script looks Arabic possibly, or Urdu? Apart from that, I can't offer much help I'm afraid.

I'll give those a miss. I can't click a dead number. Yes I know it's an item number in eBay but most times there's a link to click.

I don't know how you've done that picture, but it's horrible. Ultra large (only a bit at a time is visible on my screen) and pixellated to kingdom come. I suggest you re-do it at a smaller resolution but higher quality.

Those both look like average coins that have been cleaned Az. I you bought 'em, I'd return 'em saying ' not satisfied'. T wear is considerable on both. 1945s can be any colour from gorgeous dark choccie colour to indeed quite pale. The point being, they were all darkened, but as we all know, it was an uneven process for those pennies. There may be a few with mint lustre, in which case, nab 'em!

Is it only me that got the Azda / Asda reference, or are you all wisely ignoring it? (Reference to supermarkets : it was a mild insult playing on Azda's name ...)

Further information : That date was minted for several years, up until the next official issue which was not for another 20 years. So there's rather a lot of them (same with the 1758 shilling which was minted on and on and on too). It's not worth a great deal for this reason, you'd need one in the top two grades to have any significant value.

I think he meant Asda az - a poor joke at any level Oh wait - you mentioned asda in your reply, you just didn't rise to the bait

No no, you didn't. I was genuinely glad to learn, even though (when it comes to assessing and buying coins) it's of no relevance to me. So thank you for sharing that.

The best theory is the 'late forgery' one. The theory they were supplying the halfcrown market during the 'interregnum' falls down on two counts : 1. not enough specimens show up (though if the Mint were fastidious about chasing them that might account for that) 2. the types are always the post-1874 shallow portrait types Interesting though. But not £400-£900 interesting. I might go close to a ton but no more.

Two ways I've used in the past : 1. Issue your own postal list and advertise it in the Coin News classifieds (not expensive). Be aware though, it takes time to build up a customer base, but once you have a clientele it can really deliver. 2. Find an antiques centre without a coins outlet. Offer to be their coins expert and rent a cabinet or display from them. Again though, it takes time to become 'known', but the advantage is that you get people wanting to sell to you also, and you can pick up some real bargains. I've given up using auctions after I sold two lots at one provincial auction for £30 which I thought was a reasonably fair price for them. The cheque I received? £17. You can complain all you like about FleaBay, but their fees are SantaClaus-esque by comparison.

I think you misunderstand me Huss. When I talked about 'colour' I was sepcifically responding to VickyS's use of the word, which he seemed to be using in relation to "Mint lustre red". I am quite clear (& agree with you) that Mint lustre cannot be restored. I'm really not interested in the science of it, but thank you both for enlightening me as to precisely what lustre is, I hadn't known that. I am simply - irrespective of the science - quite familiar with bronze and copper (and even silver) lustre. But to me (and oh god I wish I had a macro to avoid repeating myself to the point of nausea) "lustre" is a one-way ticket from the Mint, that once going-going-gone cannot be brought back. It may be "flow lines", it may all be Boulton Cartwheels, but whatever it is, we all - most of us - know what it is when we see it. And those examples from the Workman Sale that I quoted are where you can go and see it! Then Spinks are using a different definition of UNC in their auction catalogues than they use in their catalogue! But I absolutely agree with you 100% about "if you like it buy it .. and explain it to the wife, from a galaxy far far away"

I use Nero photoshop, when i take my pictures i always have the camera setting on the highest setting, my pictures are then generally about 1 meg each, i then crop around the coin which takes it down to the 700kb mark, then i resize it down to the 150kb mark, but always save the high res pictures for myself. Through nero photshopi can also enlarge pix, the picture here on the Half Sov was only around 40kb, so i cropped the dealers picture then blew up the OBV picture so you could see what i was looking at. So any thoughts on the Half Sov, i'm not convinced its a repunched V as the line under it looks to straight to me. Thanks for your response to my PS question It doesn't look like an underlying V to me. Difficult to see what it is though. Possibly an I ?

To my eyes, looking at the photos, item 6 has only limited lustre - you can see it in the legend and other points, ditto the reverse. The rest looks quite brown, which they may well define as "lightly toning" but to my mind simply CANNOT merit the description "Full lustre". It's also telling that Spink have a footnote in their catalogue in a few places : "Copper coins graded UNC in this catalogue have full Mint lustre". Which seems unequivocal to me. We're going to have to differ on this one Vick. You see, lustre to me IS colour, always has been, and has been too to all the dealers I've bought off over the years. And looking through the Workman sale list, apart from the coins we've mentioned, the later ones seem to refer to lustre as colour. For example : 84 : "Uncirculated with good lustre on both sides." (Yes - the colour is obvious) 86 : "Uncirculated with full lustre, lightly toned." (slightly disagree - I'd describe it as NBU, the colour is wearing a little on the reverse) 104, 105, 106 : "Uncirculated with full lustre" (Again, obviously BU in the sense of full colour) These are all talking about colour.

How do you manage to upload such large pictures az? No way are any of my Photoshop pictures (even at 5/12 minimum acceptable quality) anywhere near as small as 150k. The strange thing is, I can upload a picture that's close to the limit - 140k say - but when it's uploaded here it's apparently only half that size. However, the forum software isn't going to let me upload a >150k picture "knowing" it will be compressed smaller, will it?

Vick, you're not reading what I've written (in at least two posts so far) : "lustre" is what a coin leaves the Mint in full possession of. Over time this either oxidises or wears off, leaving traces often in the legend. "Sheen" (my term) is nothing to do with lustre. It is a quality of a copper or bronze coin that is especially attractive, as it is a silky slightly shiny reflective appearance. The coins I have with "sheen" HAVE NO LUSTRE ON THEM. NO red. But they do have this sheen quality. To wit : one 1797 twopence, two Vic copper pennies, a 1799 halfpenny, and an 1806 penny. Sheen is NOT repeat NOT an imprecise or inexact term for lustre. IT'S A DIFFERENT THING ENTIRELY. I should know, I dreamed up the term way back in this long thread.

To be fair VS, not many dealers and collectors know about or refer to these microwaves. Probably many are like me - they see a new coin with yellow/gold/red lustre, they think of it like a thin coating, and lo and behold it wears off exactly as if it was. "Sheen" is my own term, though others may have coined it also (pun intended). It is a prperty that any coin may have, though full lustre obviously trumps it. As I say, I have 3 or 4 high grade copper coins with no lustre (or only faint traces), but which have this wondrous silky shimmery surface. The coins are natural metal in colour, i.e. brown or reddish-brown, typical copper, but nevertheless they have this sheen. It is NOT lustre. That looks like classic "lustre" az - traces thereof. That's as good a term as any!