DaveG38

Just appalling. I wonder if anybody has made a study of the dates and denominations which are toned in this way. Given that they are for the most part artificially toned, it seems to me to make sense to only tone relatively common, but high grade coins, so that any problems with the process won't result in a significant financial loss. In this way profits can be maximised without too great a risk. If this is the case, then again it lends substance to the argument that rainbow toning is an artificial process. Otherwise both common and rare coins would show this feature. Thus if RT was natural, I'd expect there to be a 1934 crown with it out there, but somehow I'm betting there isn't. Similarly, has anybody seen a RT coin with significant wear? After all, if the toning occurs naturally and a worn coin was taken out of circulation say 100 years ago, it should by now show rainbow toning. I accept that in circulation, you wouldn't expect it, but once this is no longer the case, a coin should tone according to the environment it's in. That should lead to some RT coins in fine condition, yet, I dont think i've ever seen one - please correct me if I'm wrong. Even if I accept the argument that collectors only want high grade examples and that such collectors store their coins in particular conditions that lead to RT occurring, I'd still expect to see some lower grade examples, if only where gaps are filled, due to the rarity of the date. Of course, if RT is artificial, then the reason for this is obvious - there's little price mark up on a worn coin.

I know this has been debated before, but time has moved on and the options may have changed. Basically, I've a number of coins to photograph and I want to upgrade my existing digital camera, which is about 10 years old, for something that can take decent close up shots of coins, suitable for ebay or wherever. At the same time, I don't want to spend a fortune on this, so I'm looking for a best compromise between capability and cost. Any views or is the material in earlier threads still applicable?

If we take seriously, for a moment, the idea that this is natural toning - don't all shout just yet - then we have to come up with a technical and rational explanation for the toning apparently only occurring on coins in the US. By definition, that means also explaining why silver coins in the UK (and everywhere else in the world?) do not apparently tone in this way. The comment about UK coins being cleaned is just too stupid for words. Sure a few are, but the overwhelming majority are not, and few of those that tone naturally do so in any colour other than shades of grey to black. Furthermore, have you ever seen rainbow toning on other old British silverware? How many uncleaned Georgian silver tankards have you seen looking like something out of the the Beatles Yellow Submarine album cover. Equally interesting is the question of whether old US silverware also tones in rainbow colours. If it did, then there's a valid argument that there might be something in the US atmosphere that can turn silver into this multitude of colours. Exactly what that might be is difficult to say, since chemically there are few if any silver compounds that are coloured and certainly there are none that would give rainbow colouring. And then there's the question of timescale. I've got a couple of silver picture frames that need polishing evey few years to remove the black tarnish. These don't go through a multicoloured cycle before I clean them, so why would coins? So, as far as I am aware, silver sulphide is black and even in thin films doesn't display diffraction patterns in the way claimed on this site. The reason for this is that black as a colour doesn't, by definition, radiate energy in the coloured part of the electromagnetic spectrum, hence why is is black, and so it's difficult to see how a gradually blackening surface can start to display coloured toning. The argument on other toning websites is that the copper in the alloy produces other colours on the surface of the coin - that's certainly possible, but it is difficult to see how those colours would dominate when most silver coins are around 90 - 99% silver - black would be expected to dominate. It is also a completely different explanation from the diffraction one. It's also difficult to see how such diffraction patterns could arise only in the US - at the very least you would expect powdered silver sulphide to exhibit signs of irridescence and as far as I am aware it doesn't. You also have to explain why US silver sulphide produces diffraction patterns and the UK form doesn't, given that they are very simple identical substances. One explanation given is that US silver is 90% and sterling is 92.5% pure - how that makes such a huge difference is very hard to explain, since the overwhelming metal present is silver in both cases and black should quickly mask any strong underlying colours. For older coins, such as the 1800s Morgan Dollars, you'd probably also expect to see considerable signs of the underlying black toning, of the kind seen on Victoria Crowns say. Here the silver tends to go a nice steely grey with often darker ares of toning around the design. I haven't see this on the rainbow toned coins I've looked at at all, suggesting that they are cleaned before the toning can be applied. This is not to say that diffraction patterns or surface treaments are not the explanation for the colours - it's the reason these are present that matters and that isn't explained. I also don't buy the idea of cycles of toning as suggested on the above website, simply because I'd expect toning to be continuously progressive, not switching colour according to the thickness of the layer of sulphide or presence of copper - take your pick as to the explanation. I also don't buy the idea that the toning is natural simply because of the unnatural way in which the colours are spread out on the coins - that's not generally the way natural silver toning to black occurs, so I don't see why it would in the US. And finally, the giveaway, tucked away well down the page, is the admission that not all silver coins will tone to rainbow colours and artificially toned coins CAN follow the chart that the owner has designed. In other words there's no guaranteed way to tell natural from artificial toning. Based on this it isn't a big step to conclude that maybe all rainbow coins are artifically toned, since this follows from the extrapolation of these two statements. My view - it's likely all AT and a hype to extract money from people.

Probably looked at Spink or CCGB etc. IND IMP was dropped from 1949, so comes under a different reference number There's nothing like attention to detail. Still, I guess if the Mint can use the wrong punch for the 2008 20p obverse, then I guess anything is possible.

Not so much an error on the part of the seller, but I wonder why this modern item was made, but more importantly why it was struck as it was, with the threepence embedded in it and an inscription that suggests the 12 sided threepence was produced between 1937 and 1948. What happened to 1949 to 1952? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/History-of-British-Coinage-George-VI-three-pence-1937-1948-/151143091993?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item2330d48f19

Thanks everyone. I'm not really a regular ebay seller, so I don't think its worth my while investing in an expensive set up. To be honest, if the Olympus with 14 M/pixels and a super macro facility can produce the results that Tom Goodheart has above then that would suit me perfectly. I can also find one pretty cheaply, so that looks a good bet for me. For previous photography, I've always found that using diffuse light in the conservatory works for me, so far as illumination goes.

Many of them seem to be nice quality, but easily moved as they don't have too many distinguishing features - if they did they wouldn't be as attractive as they appear to be. However, this one could be a very easy spot as it's quite unusual and distinctive:

I have just finished my fourth Picture Book for children...does that count? Been completing the illustrations in the small hours, the only time I've got for such things; very nearly ready to pack them all off to the big guns! The Pumpy Grottum has turned out to be one of my favourite characters, with 'Moley and the Treetop Cafe' my favourite story! It's good to hear about life outside collecting! I didn't know you were a kids' book illustrator Stuart? Perhaps we should ask Chris to set up a new forum, "What We Do When We're Not Collecting". I'm an amateur photographer but the members of that forum are far more talented than I, so I'm a bit shy there (no, no, really..). As we're talking about life outside coins and outside coin books, I'll mention that I too have written a children's book, entitled 'A Calamity of Clutterbucks', including the illustrations. But getting it mainstream published is another matter. I also help my other half with self publishing her poetry books - I do the 'typesetting' and cover designs etc. - she does the poetic stuff. Otherwise, I have an old Volvo P1800 that takes time and money on a grand scale to keep running, a garden that takes too much time and I play a Surdo (big bass drum) in a Samba band. My other great interest is songwriting, for which I have a Yamaha Motif synthesiser - so far 9 written and just one to go before I find a singer and go to the local studio to record them.

A quick additional update. I've now also found a 2004 penny with no portcullis studs, even though the normal type is type 2 i.e. with incuse edges to the studs. Also, on the 2000 specimens, I've found three types. All are type 2, but there are three minor types: 1. The '1' points to left of a bead and there is a wide gap between the letters and the rim. 2. The '1' points to left of a bead and there is a narrower gap between the letters and the rim. 3. The '1' points to the right of a bead.

Should we now start to call him Droolin' Declan do you think?

You're the man, Dave! Whilst I'll never be collecting in this field, or will ever check my change (even though I do occasionally look at my 20p's), I totally respect the methodology and dedication!Great stats...and just when Declan thought he was free! Coinery, I've no intention of continuing this kind of study again - it was extremely tedious - so I'm not likely to be reporting on the twopence etc. However, I am overawed by those earlier numismatists in the dying days of £SD, who studied all the pre-decimal material before it disappeared. One individual examined around 250,000 specimens. The name V R Court springs to mind, but there were many others, plus Ron Stafford who examined much post decimal 'silver'. Dave G

OK, the survey is complete. 2118 pennies have been checked and here's the results: 1971 63 All type 1 1973 13 All type 1 1974 11 All type 1 1975 12 All type 1 1976 13 All type 1 1977 18 All type 1 1978 11 All type 1 1979 21 All type 1 1980 20 All type 1 1981 17 All type 1 1982 12 All type 1 1983 12 All type 1 1984 12 All type 1 1985 9 All type 1 1986 13 All type 1 1987 33 All type 1 1988 55 All type 1 1989 32 All type 1 1990 36 All type 1 1991 13 type 1 1 type 2 1992 31 type 2 1993 25 type 1 15 type 2 1994 40 type 1 42 type 2 1995 20 type 2 1996 51 type 2 1997 42 type 2 1998 74 type 2 1999 78 type 2 2000 93 type 2 2001 162 type 2 2002 62 type 2 2003 116 type 2 2004 90 type 2 2005 71 type 2 2006 56 type 2 2007 41 type 1 43 type 2 2008 30 type 1 1 type 2 2008 49 New Type 2009 84 New Type 2010 102 New Type 2011 91 New Type 2012 179 New Type 2013 2 New Type Based on this, it looks like type 1 and 2 varieties occur for the years 1991, 1993, 1994, 2007 and 2008. If the numbers are to be believed, the 1991 type 2 is fairly scarce and the 2008 type 2 is rather rarer. One thing that was quite clear from this survey is that the quality of the strike varies considerably for both types. On type 1 reverses, there are many examples where the portcullis rivets are almost worn away, even where the coin still has lustre present. Similarly some of the type 2 reverses show nearly missing rivets, particularly on the left hand side. All in all, either there are many weakly struck specimens or, perhaps more likely, worn punches have been used leading to details not being struck up properly. The one exception to this was 2004, where I have found a coin without any sign of any rivets, and this specimen still retains much of it's lustre. I can't, in all honesty conclude that it is a weakly struck type 1 although I am pretty sure that it isn't a type 2, as there is no sign of any incuse cutting into the coin, where the rivets should be.

Dave, please! Life's too short! I know, but its been a lovely sunny day, I've been out walking on the coast, had a very nice pub lunch and a relaxing sunbathe in the late afternoon, so I'm nicely relaxed for a bit of eyeglass work.

So far, I've looked through 400 pennies and found that the two types are present in 1991, 1993, 1994, and interestingly 2007. Only 1600 more to look through!!

Excellent.

Drat and double drat - yet another addition to the book. The possibility of varieties in the decimal series is something I mention in my books, as basically most large scale studies of decimal coins seem to have stopped around 1982 or so. Since then I haven't been able to find any studies, leaving the field clear for anyone to carry out this work and go down in numismatic history - or at least get a mention on here! I'm unclear exactly which years have the type 1 and type 2 portcullis, so can't be sure whether there are varieties in individual years. However, a quick check through my pot of copper waiting to go to the bank shows that all pre-1994 are type 1 and post 1997 are type 2. However, in 1994, I have found both types, so clearly either the changeover occurred in 1994 or the two reverse dies were used for several years and I haven't yet found any examples to back this up. At the risk of extreme boredom, I might go down to the bank and take out a significant amount of copper with the idea of trying to establish the 'rules' for this design change.

I should mention there are no bids on that auction, though. So it's not necessarily an accurate reflection of their price. Mmm. Assuming these are sterling silver, then there's just under 12 ounces of silver. Current silver price is £15 approx, so scrap value would be around £180. Makes £175 look about right. Beyond this they have little value to a collector, since they aren't the kind of thing that most collectors want. Edit: Paulus got there first and with a much more specific price at £168.

Am I the only one who finds this whole trend very depressing, even though it does push up the paper values of many coins in my collection?

This is a difficult one, becasue although the grade of the coin is quite good (around VF??) the extensive corrosion and verdigris takes the value down considerably. Add to this the fact that for some reason, halfpennies are less popular than pennies and it becomes quite difficult to value. Then factor in the ebay effect and who knows. I'd go slightly better than Paulus at around £150ish on a good day.

According to the Mellors and Kirk headline, this is a single collection auction. That's one hell of an expensive collection - all that gold and the proof sets!!

My other half's only interest in coins lies with spending them!!

I appreciate that London Coins is a reputable auctioneers, with plenty of experience, but are we absolutely sure that their assessment of this crown is correct. As far as I can see, the weight they quote is correct give or take 0.1gm and their only criterion for it being a fake is a small bubble or two on the reverse. Given the era it was struck in, it seems to me to be perfecty possible for a flan to show small flaws - after all they show up on coins almost uo to the present day. Is that really enough to condemn this coin I wonder, or are there other factors that they haven't quoted?

Eh? I just browsed the September catalogue online and there isn't a single wreath crown in there, that I can see? Lots 2061 to 2081?

I've just been looking through the London Coins catalogue and was struck by the collection of wreath crowns being sold, almost all of which are well worn. It's almost as if the seller set out to buy the lowest grade he/she could find.