Coinery

I forgot to say Paulus, the background is a page of the homilies "appointed to be read in the churches at the time of Queen Elizabeth of famous memory: and now thought fit to be reprinted by authority from the King's most excellent Majesty" - I love that introduction to the homilies, you just couldn't make it up! It's a 1683, Charles II text, I chose it because the colour and pattern gave me the least amount of colour adjustment on the coin images. Pure laziness, as well as a lack of knowledge and ability with the camera! Too much technology and not enough capacity to take it all in!

Which flavour of 1922 threepence is it? Dull or bright? Dull...a weak obverse, but the point of that mustache is just about there. Does '22 slot into that mushy-strike period, or is this a poor example of type? The 20thC thing is way out of my comfort zone, but extremely rewarding. I've got the whole G5 and G6 series in the headlights at the moment, and really enjoying it! Still need to pinch-up on that resizing and lighting!

Agreed, it surely wouldn't come off so easily if it was actual verd. And that's absolutely fair enough, but haven't you ever come across a 20thC bronze with the lightest beginnings of a green 'bloom' that comes away leaving the coin as-new, before it's got more than microscopically into the metal? Or ever acetoned/washed/wiped a coin, whatever your method, and found green residue on the cotton bud/tissue, etc, etc.? I do know for a personal fact that early onset verdigris does quite happily come away from a non-degraded (un-pitted) surface. It's altogether a different animal when the surface of the coin is no longer clearly defined. Namely, when the verdigris and the surface of the coin have started to become one. Anyway, the coin's fine, and I'm pleased!

Oh come on, you're just taking the piss!

No, regular slab issue for this one! I've still got the cotton bud if anyone knows of a simple chemical experiment to determine the composition of the green coloured residue on it? What can you add to a copper component that guarantees a colour change or an explosion or something? Try adding ammonia solution. Any blue colour would indicate would indicate presence of copper ions. Copper ions react with ammonia to give blue copper hydroxide. (Further addtion of ammonia will give a deep blue copper complex but you haven't got enough substance on the cotton bud for this test) Excellent, Sword, will give that a go! What would be the easiest source of ammonia...chemist? I can get a 9.5% solution from boots! Strong enough, do you think?

No, regular slab issue for this one! I've still got the cotton bud if anyone knows of a simple chemical experiment to determine the composition of the green coloured residue on it? What can you add to a copper component that guarantees a colour change or an explosion or something?

'Wallet!' Only just got it, pies!

Apparently, the dreaded green can be copper carbonate, chloride or acetate. These three compounds are soluble in acetic acid, ethanol and alcohol (or water) respectively. However, knowing bugger all about chemistry - I can't vouch for the correctness of this info. I have never tried to remove verd spots as I don't collect copper. Hence I have no practical experience in this but am now tempted to try out some experiments!Copper carbonate is a base and so will dissolve (react) with acid. Thinking more about it, you are right Coinery. Copper chloride is solube in acetone and I assume can be removed that way. (I shouldn't trust an article too readily without a bit more thought). Copper carbonate is insolube in water and I think is also insolube in acetone. However, if the verd has not eaten in, then acetone will at least act as a lubricant and should help to an extent. Acetone is an organic solvent and should be very good with plastic residues. I still think that the main responsibilities of a TPG are to accurately grade the coin and to make certain that the slabbing process is not going to cause extra harm to a coin. It is a tad unrealistic to expect them to analyse the suface of the coin to see if there are any harmful substances on it. If it looks like a problem is developing, one should be prepared to crack the slab open to sort it out. If people are worried about the edge of the coin, then the NGC slab design shows the edge. I don't think slabbing is prefect by any means but I am of the opinion that a slabed coin has less chance of picking up damage (physcially or chemically). Slabed coins developing problems always raise eyebrows but a much much greater number are sitting safely (as far as one can tell ) in the slab. Yes, I think the acetone is only acting as a cleaning agent, rather than chemically 'reacting' with the verd. I've only ever been able to remove the light beginnings of verd with acetone, rather than deep seated spots, and I genuinely think that was the case with the '22 3d. If it really was a plastic reaction from a flip, I would've expected the edge to have been the least affected? But by the by! Anyway, as you say, it's unreasonable to expect TPG's to analyse the surface and atmospheric contaminants slabbed away with the coin. It's just always been something that has niggled me, and one of the first questions I ever asked of the slabbing process; wondering whether you can just lock a slab away, safe in the knowledge it's entombed and protected from environmental factors. In reality this is not the case and, knowing that CGS fiercely reject even the faintest traces of 'corrosion' (I know this from personal experience with them), it only leads me to believe FINALLY that coins can begin to deteriorate in slabs, as of course they can out of them! Whether we will see more and more issues as slabs start to age, who knows but, in light of recent evidence (my verd 1951 penny taken from a US slab, and the uncomfortably verd-like edge on the 3d), I think there could be more to come. Anyone know how old the first ever encapsulated TPGC coin would be now (and I don't mean the age of the coin inside )?

One of the few shows you could put on half-way through and still really enjoy it!

I'm just watching the follow-up Richard III documentary 'the unseen story,' and I am so glad to find that THAT woman has been effectively gagged by some excellent editing. The first programme was more 'reality TV' in style than a serious documentary, on account of her dramatic self-indulgences!

Apparently, the dreaded green can be copper carbonate, chloride or acetate. These three compounds are soluble in acetic acid, ethanol and alcohol (or water) respectively. However, knowing bugger all about chemistry - I can't vouch for the correctness of this info. Where's Declan when you need him? He can generally pull a chemistry dissertation out the bag when you need one! Acetic acid NEVER disappoints on verdigris!

You do sometimes get green on hammered silver. I presume it's because the silver is mixed with copper to the correct fineness and sometimes you get a bit that's not so well mixed in and that's where the copper salts develop... debased silver hammered!

Acetone definitely removes light surface verd, IF you catch it in time, I've done so on dozens of copper and bronze coins in the past! I guess my main point is CGS may very well have been unaware of the contaminate, whatever it is, but that doesn't detract from the fact that it was there, and with the potential to irreparably damage the coin over the long haul, which has always been a main concern of mine!

.500 silver. The other 50% is vulnerable isn't it?

Yes, Acetone...love the stuff! I do have to tell the chemist what I'm planning to do with the stuff when I buy 2 bottles or more!

Clive (historic coinage) has one for sale at £12500. Just wished I could afford it. I do wonder whether the prices will go up on the back of the recent discovery? I know I looked at R3 for the first time, even though I was only window shopping. History is pretty infectious!

Yes, you have realised the imperfection of the Spink catalogue. Under one Spink number you can literally have dozens of coins, from an ultra-rare variety, right through to the commonest type, all priced the same, of course! Having said that, as a quick reference I quite like it. It's a giant leap, but there's really nothing of great value inbetween...Brown, Comber & Wilkinson's book 'The Hammered Silver Coins Produced at the Tower Mint During the Reign of Elizabeth I. (2006) Updated 2012. It's the best out there, and it is good! In fact it's excellent! Don't be tempted by JJ North for Elizabeth, it doesn't add anything to the information in Spink's.

You have a razor shears? I've got an 18" Husqvarna!

I watched the first one and kept expecting (hoping) that Tony Robinson would pop up and punch her lights out. My 'favourite' bit of the first program was the incredulous look on the faces of the two Medical Consultants when The Woman had to leave the room on account of it being all too much FOR ALL OF US! The second program was excellent, I look forward to more scientific facts emerging from the ongoing investigation. Shame R3's not a cheap series to collect...will the prices go up?

Had my head in the book while you were responding! I was initially thinking inverted 8, but the reverse devices say 1569. Fortunately, the lions are the very distinctive punch 52 (which instantly gives us 69-72) and, as TGH has already pointed out, the coronet MM was finished in '70. The Lis are also identifiable as 34 (1569-1571). Also, the shield's right for the year, so 1969 is your year (as we can already see the 6). This reverse was the common pairing with obverse 2 (BCW CN-2). However, whilst it's not a recorded pairing (as many aren't, yet) the obverse Privy mark does look like it might very well be over a lion (BCW CN-1), but that is something that can't be completely confirmed without a die-match, which wouldn't be so difficult, as the Lion privy mark is much rarer. So, either: BCW CN-1:CN-i4 (coronet over lion obverse) or BCW CN-2:CN-i4 (straight coronet obverse) Your bust is 4B by the way Damned modern copies. They get everywhere. I did just recently pick up a rubbish 1571 copy (another year to add to the watch list)! Though the '71 was not really a 'genuine' counterfeit, I did get a PROPER Liz shilling forgery that seuk emailed me about! Not sure if I actually thanked you for that seuk? Thank-you! Just got it, Rob!

ARGENTUMANDCOINS I tell you why (IMO!) but you won't like it: 1, if the dealers send their coins for CGS grading, most (not all but most) of their UNC coins will be returned as EF, some as AUNC but some also as VF55. The same applies to EF, VF coins etc. Just ask Bill who already submitted around 2000 coins, or Divemaster. I have exactly the same experience. As NUMISMATIST said : quote "In fact I would say MOST Large Auctioneers and MOST large dealers, many being BNTA members seriously overgrade these days". I can confirm this from my own experience. Now when I am more familiar with CGS grading it takes me just few seconds on the coin show to see that the offered UNC coin would never ever make even a basic UNC80 grade... So instead of making vast profits they would suffer vast losses. 2, lot (not all) of coin dealers are not interested in a transparent coin market. With slabbed coin you can’t buy the coin as about EF and sell it as almost UNC and make large profit. As one of many examples – just recently I have noticed Victorian YH Halfcrown , sold in recent DNW auction (where described as GEF and sold for around 800,- pounds) on Coin Dealer website - described as choice mint state with price tag of 1500,- pounds. So either the vendor or new buyer was ripped off. DNW is happy with their profit, dealer is very happy with his profit and the buyer??? This is happening all the time and you have to realise that not all coin collectors are as experienced as lot of members on this forum and that it takes years to learn. In the meantime you rely on coin dealers and if you are not experienced enough you buy choice mint state halfcrown for 1500,- …. I wish CGS was around when I started collecting 20 years ago. 3, I do not understand your comment about “auction prices realized by the sister company of the slabbing firmâ€. Are you suggesting that London Coins is bidding against London Coins just to spend 500,- pounds on a coin worth 50, - pounds to show the public how good it is to have coin slabbed??? Yes they offer lot of slabbed coins in their auctions but if I want to sell slabbed coin I would certainly ask London Coins because I am sure that collectors who are interested in slabs are keeping eye on their auctions. I think your points 1. and 2. have a lot of merit Mike. There have always been apples in the dealer barrel that range from the rotten to the "over-enthusiastic", but a lot too - as you say - who are straight. But your point 3 could use some research on your part if you don't mind me saying. A company that slabs very ordinary coins and then (possibly) gets an employee to put them up on eBay with a lot of hype and vastly inflated prices (or bidding), to show the effect of slabbing on prices... well, I don't wish to be libellous, but it goes on. Thank you for your comments. You may be right and I am not going to advocate something I know very little about. Saying that I am not going to do any research in that respect - I rather invest my time in my hobby. I got involved in the discussion just because I have noticed that some of the members (which are usually strongly against slabbing) have very poor knowledge about the subject and I also felt that some of the comments towards CGS are unfair (when compared with my personal experience). Otherwise I am primarily interested in coin collecting - not slabbing! Around X-mas I have posted picture of George IV Halfcrown (my X-mas present, slab partially visible) and first reply was "Nice coin, shame it is in plastic coffin". I don't get it, I would never ever comment post from other member "Nice coin, shame it is not in a nice slab". Hope you know what I mean. I think your approach is entirely sensible, Mike, we are all first and foremost collectors and enthusiasts of all things coin! Speaking only for myself, I like both slabbed and raw, it really depends on my reason for buying it, or slabbing it. I have broke out around a dozen coins altogether, the 1951 6d I recently purchased from Ms Lockett is already out the slab, and waiting in a 2x2 alongside my other G6 coins for an eventual upgrade! It seems to me that this subject ultimately requires tolerance and sensitivity of preferences. It has bounced back and forth for many months, with very little change in anyone's opinion, leading me to believe nothing can be said to convert an intelligent individual one way or the other? Great debate, yet again, but the usual stale mate I think?

Cheers, Declan! Do you use the capsule/foam insert system on all your coins?

Had my head in the book while you were responding! I was initially thinking inverted 8, but the reverse devices say 1569. Fortunately, the lions are the very distinctive punch 52 (which instantly gives us 69-72) and, as TGH has already pointed out, the coronet MM was finished in '70. The Lis are also identifiable as 34 (1569-1571). Also, the shield's right for the year, so 1969 is your year (as we can already see the 6). This reverse was the common pairing with obverse 2 (BCW CN-2). However, whilst it's not a recorded pairing (as many aren't, yet) the obverse Privy mark does look like it might very well be over a lion (BCW CN-1), but that is something that can't be completely confirmed without a die-match, which wouldn't be so difficult, as the Lion privy mark is much rarer. So, either: BCW CN-1:CN-i4 (coronet over lion obverse) or BCW CN-2:CN-i4 (straight coronet obverse) Your bust is 4B by the way

It was a sort of 'oh, no, what have you gone and done, Colin' type of oooooooooooh! Colin the starter of the discussion!

Oooooooooooooooooooooooh Colin!