Coinery

Thanks, chaps! Just another question, do they suggest a shipping cost in the invoice, or do you have to ring them for this anyway?

I'll just empty the sawdust out of me wellies and I'll be right there! Better make the showdown in Stroud then, cowboy, we can fight it out over their dozen or so coin lots! 50ml of petrol each...may the best man win! I'm only comin' with 18" and rawhide so make it a clean fight! No scratchin' or pullin' hair, Declan, or I'll tell Peck!

Lockdales will invoice you Stuart and the 3% admin will be included. Theyu are usually pretty sharp. Thanks, John! Is that by post or email? You know why I ask!

So, is it a telephone call to lockdales to make payment and arrange postage, or do they email you? Do lockdales take The Saleroom fee, or is that done separately? What do you guys do?

Something I especially like about this transparency software, is the rather pleasing effect of combining the strong points of two coins - merged together they produce an eye-appealling coin, if only the bottom coin existed! The bottom overlaid image has, for example, all the beading across the front of the dress, a chain is now present on the necklace, the ear's complete, a top bar now exists on the A in Maria, etc, etc, etc!

absolutely. An afternoon, a chainsaw and a few vanloads. Woodshed work tomorrow for me... Good on ya Declan! We still carry a NICE chainsaw in the boot of the car (chain hand-sharpened [properly]), ready for the return of the days! Soon to be upon us! Wood burner at both ends of a 70 ft steel tube!

OK, so the proposed genuine coin above is now mine, solely for the purpose of determining its silver content, and resolving the first of the questions about the original counterfeit's origins, I hope! So, if anyone wants the die-match (following a positive silver test) it's for sale at £88 or greater?

Before going veggie I worked ferrets, lurchers, shot, trapped, fished, AND also Night Hawked with Harris'! I presume you're talking about a different thing?

First Die-match for the counterfeit! I noticed one major thing that stands out is the broken lion punch on the reverse shield (It looks like the Spink's 2012 plate coin also has the broken lion punch, but is a different die [that would've been a noteworthy discovery, to say the least ]), which is missing one of its rear legs, so I started looking around for the broken lions and found my first match. The obverse images below are (apologies, I overdid the resize): Top - Counterfeit coin with 15 key markers (I could've done more, but I don't think it would've made the case any stronger). Middle - Recently discovered die-match, with the same 15 markers. Bottom - The two images overlaid with transparency. I've also added the two reverses for comparison. I haven't 'tested' them together, but I'm thinking they will fit together rather nicely. So, believing the die-match coin to be a genuine example - and it certainly looks a million dollars more so than the counterfeit - what's going on? I'm presuming a counterfeit set of dies were produced from an original coin, and superbly convincing pewter/tin copies were produced en mass! ANY THOUGHTS either way, please!!!!!! BEWARE THE LEGLESS LION! I'm going to see how many groat dies I can find out there (anyone for a speculatory guess, given her short reign, and imminent marriage to Philip?), and set it up in the same fashion as the Liz dies, making a special feature of the obverse and reverse die to watch out for! I also forgot to mention that an obvious stand-out obverse detail is seen at the central cross (not the top cross) in the crown, which has the crisp infill between the branches. If anyone knows the name of that particular cross and/or the name for the individual 'triangle-branches' of it, I'd very much appreciate that information too.

Just to clarify re a catalogue...I was thinking of something spink-like in it's basic recording of type, setting out, perhaps, a rough valuation, one against the other, as they do in the spink book! Maybe not!

Last time I bought from them, postage for a few small single lots was £7. Many thanks, Nick!

Blimey, I'm falling asleep listening to this! Does anyone know whether the postage charges are reasonable, or whether you have to organise your own courier etc?

Try this, Stuart. Thanks, Clive, I couldn't find that for love nor money on the ayePhone last night!

Yes, welcome Kurisu! Now about these capsules! I personally have never bought one, preferring the cardboard-edged, clear-windowed, flips, stored in a numis 2x2" album (6 per page)! I use the 2nd page to house purpose-printed 2x2" catalogue card insert for ID. Sorry, but I'm certain someone can help, given your untimely ejection from the forum!

An excellent question! I personally have no clue, but will be watching this thread in the hope it's a long one! I have a half ( no pun intended) interest in these myself! I think Peter's right, in that the single, most important, feature, must surely be that the halves and quarters must clearly identify the host coin! I would think this area is begging for a catalogue! Then watch the prices rocket! £££££

CGS valued it at £6 and even that's strong!

It has a scratch on the REV Peter, accentuated by the plate size picture (i'll post shortly) its 1687/6 and i think G/A in MAG, although not described as such, so G/A in MAG? Looks like G/A to me, Dave, good spot!

I did see a Edward VII gold two pounds that had been worn as a jewellery item, it's edges were very much erroded and rounded. It did have obvious mount-marks however. For the edge of this coin to be rounded, it couldn't have been protected by a ring mount. You absolutely can't write it off, it could have spent some time in a sandy/beach environment, anything's possible, the weight's in your favour. I think, as peckris said, that it needs an in-hand appraisal unfortunately. What we need is a good die-study of all those coins with known fakes haunting them. Where 'modern' milled is concerned, we are back to the provenance thing again. If I was ever to buy a Gothic Crown again, it would have to come with some substantial paperwork and/or catalogue history that predates these arses who are bombarding us with all this tat!

I'd rate that between VF and EF to be honest What, not EF details? Interestingly, two different R punches on the reverse!

In the first post I described the edge as milled which I thought was the pattern on the perimeter of the faces.Following your comments I now realise that it is the actual face of the edge of the coin - this appears fairly smooth apart from what looks like general knocks and knicks. The thickness is 1.1mm in the centre and 1mm at the edge. I believe it's starting to look like something that has been in the family for many years is not what it seems?!! Regards How many years, if you don't mind me asking? I only ask because the Chinese fakes are comparatively recent, but there was a great spate of Middle East fakes of gold coins in the 1970s. If it goes back a long way, it is less likely (though far from impossible) to be a fake. However it could be a counterfeit which would make it of historic interest, and of course the gold value is not to be ignored. Does anyone have a date for the earliest of the known Chinese fakes? Also, Peck, just out of interest, do you happen to know the earliest of the 70's material?

Overlaying images with transparency is easy enough, most sensible image processing software packages will be able to do that. However, finding a package to negate the distortion might be more challenging. Can you post a picture and explain what you want doing? Then we might be able to have a bash with whatever packages we have available... Yes, I'm sorry, Rob, I too meant to reply but... A quick post of the 'good' die and the 'stretched' one would clarify what you're after, and what the possibilities are. With transparency overlays, the difficult part is seeing the differences without repeatedly moving the images on and off each other, which you might need the software it was created on to do?????? Once we can see your needs, it might?? be possible to set the whole thing up with a bit of software, and then send you the exported images separately in their transparent forms...I think that might??? work???? The software I use, took me about 2 days of playing with to understand the basic functions, thereafter there's an infinite amount of time you could spend! However, I only ever learn that which is needed for my own purpose...same with the camera, a very capable piece of kit that does only 1/2 % of what it's capable of, but it's only the 1/2% I'm interested in!

It means that it is a coin that would have been graded around the EF mark, had it not been rejected for whatever reason (cleaning, environmental damage, surface hairlines etc). Ok, it has a scratch on the REV, but personally with the scratch i'd say GVF. Maybe better to give a correct grade than DETAILS.....It's a 1687/6 and i think G/A in MAG Shilling As a feather in the cap of CNG...I let them have about 20 coins around 2 year's ago...I'm still reeling from the 1in 4 they returned unslabbed! Made me cautious from an altogether angle I can tell you. With CNG you have to think 'will they slab this,' or will I have to spread the failed slabbing cost across those that were, which is what I had to do! Quite a wake-up!

I think VF details, as we are frequently seeing with NGC is perhaps a new way of saying a hammered coin is mostly bloody good, but with a lot of flat spots, etc which, in reality, is a difficult coin to grade, as strike weakness in hammered is such a common thing! It's definitely a crowd-pleasing statement, from the paying slabber's perspective, which is why they're doing it I'm sure! BUT EF details...???? That's a p*ss-take too far IMO! NGC are losing credibility...if they ever had it! What is it, hammered, early-milled? Please don't tell me it's more recent than hammered! Shocking!

In the first post I described the edge as milled which I thought was the pattern on the perimeter of the faces.Following your comments I now realise that it is the actual face of the edge of the coin - this appears fairly smooth apart from what looks like general knocks and knicks. The thickness is 1.1mm in the centre and 1mm at the edge. I believe it's starting to look like something that has been in the family for many years is not what it seems?!! Regards The smooth edge is not a good omen, you should be looking at some nice crisp diagonal ridges, the edge is the bit that most counterfeiters struggle with. My money's on it being a bad one. With an edge like the one you have, and the suspicions that already accompany the coin, I'd be looking to see if the surface tests + for gold and, if it did, and not a lot would like this, but I'd give that poor edge a light scrape to see if beauty is just skin deep! For me, it's always about calculated risks when it comes to pursuing metal integrity in these types of instances!

Gosh, this whole forum has me as suspicious as hell at the moment. The weight is good for the grade, however, the V in GeorgiVs jumped out at me like a sore thumb, I don't ever recall seeing an infilled letter of that fashion on anything else before? I confess to knowing very little about early-milled gold, but any chance of a look at the edge? Does the milling appear 'right,' complete with no seams etc (having said that, if it's cast, which it just looks SO cast to me, it wouldn't have any seams, maybe a filed/flattened area for removal of a spur)? Here goes old suspicion again...counterfeiters manage to achieve good gold-weight with thicker, or larger diameter coins, your's should be a 25/26mm coin. You'll have to forgive me, it's just my genuine-coin-faith is at an all-time low at the minute.