Coinery

Having a theatre/recovery background, I can clearly see how key-hole surgery would be appropriate in some cases? I guess this will no doubt be an offered service one day; a microscopic hole and cannula application of chemical therapy to any and all re-submitted coins affected by contaminants!

I so look forward to saving all my findings in that way, I have already lost substantial and personally important coin data from lack of time and organisation...I bow down, Peck!

I'm not sure if you've misunderstood my point VC, I'm not talking about oxidation in the common sense but, rather, how can it be determined that "verd" is stable just from looking at it?'Bubbling' starts somewhere, of course, but it has a beginning! How is it determined, as BRG has confidently done, that the process has ended? This is what I'm interested in! I don't believe the green spots are Verdigris at all. Thus, I don't believe they are active in that sense. True verdigris is a reaction of acetic acid with copper, and has a certain "bubbly" look to it as VS described. These few tiny green spots simply don't appear as such, and have no signs of continued reaction with the surface metal (e.g., the lustre is still visible microscopically underneath the translucent green spots). Oh, right, that makes sense, if you don't believe it to be verdigris! Claiming stable verdigris under magnification is altogether a different animal! It might just wipe off with a bit of acetone?

I'm not sure if you've misunderstood my point VC, I'm not talking about oxidation in the common sense but, rather, how can it be determined that "verd" is stable just from looking at it?'Bubbling' starts somewhere, of course, but it has a beginning! How is it determined, as BRG has confidently done, that the process has ended? This is what I'm interested in!

Just out of interest, how do you determine verd activity at magnification? Verdigris usually accumulates at the surface and can be seen "eating" into the coin's surface. These small green spots are translucent, and the coin's lustre can be seen beneath them. No signs of "active" acidic verd. It's the term "active" that most interests me! How do you determine that it's stable and not active?

Not really my area but, you're obviously serious, and that is a most welcome quality on here...welcome aboard, douna!

Just out of interest, how do you determine verd activity at magnification?

Ps the forum still isn't displaying correctly on safari, and I don't have edit buttons! Other safari accessed forums using the same software are working fine!

Ps the forum still isn't displaying correctly on safari, and I don't have edit buttons!

Got mine, but the 1840 two-prong might need updating already! What a price for a raggy coin that barely makes VF overall! £130

If you really want to dazzle your public, you could always add it's a "BCW Sixpence AC-2A:b1" Another point...I'd really try and lighten those images and maybe remove some of the blue? It makes it look very pewtery and polished!

S2563 That'll go quite well for you, the acorn is a rarer and popularly known PM! The mintmarks as documented in spinks goes 77-27, which means, if you go back to the mintmarks at the start of the Elizabeth bit, it'll be all the mintmarks between these two numbers, which includes 65b as you rightly say!

And the penny (sorry about the images...just a quick photo from a book).

BCW cite Challis in their book, saying that the Anchor coinage was light. Taking a look at the anchor penny I've just bought, would suggest that the pennies were clearly struck on much smaller flans! Here's a size comparison (different busts, of course) of a threefarthing (0.48g) and the Anchor penny (0.50g): Also, below is the same bust as seen on the anchor penny, but here on a threefarthing (rose behind bust) AND a different Privy Mark penny in the next post! I think the inner circle is clearly smaller on the anchor penny when compared to the other penny? It looks to me that the inner circle is far more threefarthing-like, suggesting that the 1599/1600 punters were only getting threefarthing's worth for their penny?

Brilliant, thanks, gents!

I'm guessing I must have knocked something by accident, as I'm now receiving numerous emails of postings on the forum! Any ideas how to switch those type of alerts off, I can't see a way?

Betty Botter bought a bit of butter. But the butter Betty bought was bitter! So Betty bought another bit of butter, better than the bit of butter Betty bought before. You're wasted! No, I mean you're wasted! Ok, I will come clean, I am actually a bot - a SpamMaster 3000TM. And one of my advanced functions is to generate random tongue-twisters on web sites, based on key words - this one was triggered by Coinery's use of the word 'botter'.You can't beat a better bit of botter!

Betty Botter bought a bit of butter. But the butter Betty bought was bitter! So Betty bought another bit of butter, better than the bit of butter Betty bought before. You're wasted! No, I mean you're wasted!

My last girlfriend was Ed Sheeran's aunt, the girlfriend before worked for the bbc and got me on the inner circle of casualty (where you'll see me as a frequent extra in the original series) and the Sunderland Football Club, where I spent every home-match for 2 seasons in the player's lounge (ordered a beer, standing alongside David Beckham...I was served first! ), Terry Pratchet was a customer...and also performed on the Sunderland Empire stage as the lead in a play, and also sang a Beatles song at the Casualty wrap party with Ian Kelsey et al. Etc. etc.Now look at me! PS recovered a couple of famous people in my nursing days...of note was wiping the bottom of a famous European horse-riding lady - that bottom was good, despite it all!

Maybe, Peck, I'd certainly create a more intelligent and likely post if I was botting for a living...maybe this is a better bot, than your average botter? Come forth and seek our sincere apologies if we're wrong!

Totally agree! Whatever the rarity level, it's an iconic Halfcrown in the collectability stakes!

I think even The Cure themselves would say they'd never of made it but for Peely!

Wow. That's something that us lesser mortals can only dream about.Needless to say it's the pride of his entire HC collection! He bought the complete set from an elderly family friend who was bequeathed them (along with other significant HC's) by a family member/collector who'd pulled them at the year of their issue!Fabulous story, and quite an asset, to say the least! I must press him for some images????

I know somebody who has an uncirculated set of E7 halfcrowns (with the history to go with it)! By all accounts has ALL the HC's from early-milled to-date!

I think weak strike, as opposed to 'regional' wear, as the beading, relative to the shield quarters, is still rather good. Whilst my C1 fine-work knowledge is lacking, I have to agree, in light of them being presentation pieces, that a quality strike would've been very important, which your's isn't...at least not to fine work standards? I suppose the question could always be asked 'how many pieces were struck to achieve 1 quality piece?' Also, what happened to the surplus? Were they circulated or melted?