Peckris

I'm a troll No really, I am - ask Dave

Hah! Really really high grade 1806 halfpenny, anyone? Can't find one to match my other two denominations, not for love nor money, yet it's 'supposedly' a very common coin. :angry:

PM Dave (azda) - he will set you straight! Otherwise, it's a 'love that dare not speak its name' for fear of being sued!!

It's not my coin - yet It is offered at £25 which seemed to me to be a really good price but I'm a little hesitant because I have no real clue yet when it comes to valuing coins. I know that grading comes with experience and I have tried using some books & websites as references so as to know what to look for. Another thing I'm not sure about is the difference in colour on a 1806/07 penny. I know that uncirculated are always going to look different but even the worn ones appear to be vastly different shades - from almost a dark chocolate brown to a much lighter shade like the one I posted above. Is this from cleaning or just different lighting on the photo? Thank you for the advice, collecting in EF is just what I was thinking because I like a slightly worn look (I like to think the coin had a useful life!) but at the same time I want most of the detail because they are beautiful to look at. I already have a couple of Victorian half crowns and I love them but I just can't afford to build a large collection of them so I think I will maybe just have 1 really nice silver per monarch. I'd say £25 was a perfectly reasonable price for that There's a very big colour range in 18th Century coppers - from pale red/brown to virtually black. Whether this is due to small variations in the metal mix used, or the environmental conditions of storage, or both, is hard to say. Photography would also be a factor. There is some variation too in bronze, and it doesn't really settle down until the mid-1920s. As long as a coin has eye appeal for you, and it hasn't obviously been polished or cleaned, then go for it! That's interesting about the colour range - adds a bit of mystique and individuality! Do I need to be conscious of spotting a coin which has been cleaned? I've read that it greatly reduces a coin's value. I'm guessing this also depends on their metal content? Cleaned copper is usually pretty easy to spot - it has an unusual bright look as if Brasso or something similar had been used. You can't use dip for copper, but it can be 'whizzed' (you'll see faint striations all over it) or some chemical may have been used which again will make the coin look unnatural.

It's not my coin - yet It is offered at £25 which seemed to me to be a really good price but I'm a little hesitant because I have no real clue yet when it comes to valuing coins. I know that grading comes with experience and I have tried using some books & websites as references so as to know what to look for. Another thing I'm not sure about is the difference in colour on a 1806/07 penny. I know that uncirculated are always going to look different but even the worn ones appear to be vastly different shades - from almost a dark chocolate brown to a much lighter shade like the one I posted above. Is this from cleaning or just different lighting on the photo? Thank you for the advice, collecting in EF is just what I was thinking because I like a slightly worn look (I like to think the coin had a useful life!) but at the same time I want most of the detail because they are beautiful to look at. I already have a couple of Victorian half crowns and I love them but I just can't afford to build a large collection of them so I think I will maybe just have 1 really nice silver per monarch. I'd say £25 was a perfectly reasonable price for that There's a very big colour range in 18th Century coppers - from pale red/brown to virtually black. Whether this is due to small variations in the metal mix used, or the environmental conditions of storage, or both, is hard to say. Photography would also be a factor. There is some variation too in bronze, and it doesn't really settle down until the mid-1920s. As long as a coin has eye appeal for you, and it hasn't obviously been polished or cleaned, then go for it!

No - it lacks the Bottled Tan look of his

Fancying? Yes! Affording? No!!

That's not your coin, right? Even so, it's a perfectly collectable example of its type, and if all your 18th / early 19th Century coppers were like that, you'd have a nice collection and great fun to acquire. You could - even now - set out to collect bun pennies in EF, which are a long way below UNC in price being relatively more common. Edward VII too, though by George V you'd want to be looking at GEF minimum (unless you actually PREFER the slightly more worn coins, in which case picking up Geo V will be a doddle). For 20th Century coins you could add in halfcrowns and crowns, as from 1887 onwards - wreath crowns and Edward VII excepted - examples in EF are affordable. For Edward VII you could settle for a 1902 halfcrown in EF or near.

Without the green, the penny would be Fine/Fair (obverse/reverse). But it is green... So, if it's not a 4, it would have virtually no monetary value but would certainly be an interesting keepsake. If it IS a 4, then it's a different matter entirely. The coin - even in that condition - would have a rarity value and should be entered into an auction, e.g. London Coins, once it's been officially verified. You're talking hundreds of pounds, possibly creeping up to 4 figures if the right bidders are there?

4 is known, and not as rare as the 5 in that article, but it would still be rare. However, it doesn't look quite straight to my eyes - can you zoom in, macro-style, and get a close-up of the date? The penny has the characteristic green of a long buried bronze coin. That's a chemical reaction probably similar to verdigris, but in the case of burials, where exposure to air is not a factor, the process has become inert and though the green is permanent, it won't deteriorate further.

The penny is certainly the least rare of the three 1860 copper coins.

Here's an 1821 sixpence (the R of BRITANNIAR) :

That's a nice ancient - and without the bright 'cleaned' look so many of them have.

Hmm. It doesn't look to me so much like an A - more like a cud?

They weren't all poorly struck, so that places the poor examples at a disadvantage or conversely the better examples at a premium. Either way, it shouldn't affect the grading which should be 'what it is', not 'what it should be given the poor strike'.

I think the overstrike is the same as the Nicholson example, so whatever it is (T over A, T over slanted I) they are both examples of it IMO. (I've sent you a PM).

This is partly where the discussion lies. To demonstrate, I don't have any pennies, but I do have a pair of 1876H halfpennies which asks the same question. The Heaton proof/specimen has much less sharp lettering than say the unambiguous 1867 bronzed proof, http://www.colincooke.com/coin_images/halfpenny_merge/397.jpg i.e. it ticks some boxes but not others. For comparison sake, here is the 1876H which was slabbed as a proof in the Terner sale and was considered a proof by Freeman (this was his coin also). However, others considered it to fall short, preferring to call it a specimen strike and so the debate continues............ That certainly ticks many of the proof boxes for me, but I am only looking at a picture at the end of the day. However, could it not be argued that Heatons didn't have the proof minting expertise of the RM and that therefore their proof strikings are a little inferior?

You said you were considering two and four pences? Apart from Vicky groats, those will have to be Maundy. 1838 & 1848 currency 2d. (S3914E) Yeah, but he's talking about all those denominations from Victoria to Elizabeth II. If he's not interested in Maundy (like many of us aren't lol) then he will have to revise his wanted denomination list.

I don't imagine any buyer is doing so in order to read it. Investment City, here we come...

I'm happy to go with that. As mentioned, even though I estimated as fine/near fine, the condition is comparable to the Nicholson good fine/fine, and I've been trusting to the photos in that collection when estimating the grades of my William III 1/2ds. I guess some of Nicholson's must be over graded then. I think many lower grade rarities are overgraded when it comes to sale time, it seems to be par for the course. I graded this particular coin on the loss of much detail including parts of the legend. I may have been a little harsh on the obverse, but I still wouldn't rate it as Fine. However, I'd be interested to know how others would grade it?

You said you were considering two and four pences? Apart from Vicky groats, those will have to be Maundy.

I agree with its being a very nice coin. If it did turn out to be an impaired proof, how would that affect its value?

I would personally grade that as G.Fair/N.Fair - that's not to demean its rarity, just a more realistic estimate of its condition.

Goddards is perfectly ok IF you follow some basic rules : 1. Never fully immerse for longer than 10 seconds, rinse thoroughly and dab dry. 2. If using on a cotton bud, don't let the dip be in contact with the stain for any longer than necessary, and wash off as in 1. If it still won't come off, abandon using dip. 3. Never use dip on a proof. 4. Never use dip on a coin with attractive natural toning.

The official proof looks to have a stronger obverse - particularly the forelock; whereas the restrike looks to have a bolder, cleaner reverse. In my book, this would give them roughly equivalent value. Certainly, both coins are equally attractive.