Coinery

Nothing to suggest it is anything other than an I Agreed. The serifs on the cross bar of the T are angled, while the "serifs" here are right angles. You can also clearly see the top edge of the 'I' well below the 'top (bottom) edge' of where the proposed 'L' would HAVE to be!

'Fraid so! Clearly so!

Any ideas why a '2' would be in the obverse legend (E of Elizabeth over 2) of a sixpence? Has this been seen before in other series, it's not recorded in BCW? The 2 measures 1.79mm, identical to the reverse 'inverted' 2!

Thanks for the trust AND privilege, Del!

So...I think the conclusions will now be, well, conclusive! Here are two close-up photos, taken with the light angled differently to best show the 'ups and downs' of the contours in the region of the 'I'! The diagonal line to the left appeared convex in some shots, but is actually a concave 'gouge,' which I think could've easily been mistaken for the left leg of a 'V'? Judgements, please, would be very much appreciated!

so it was you that broke it then......coinery overload An average 3 posts per day was just more than them those little ole forum cogs could bear! Shucks!

I've just realised, having earlier explained to a newcomer how they mustn't worry about the 'issue', and that I'd been on the forum for around a year and never witnessed any problems, that the forum broke down on my pre-decimal 1st birthday!

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/120987052366;jsessionid=4808E8FFE400C7781B5FCC01A9F9C3B1?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D120987052366%26_rdc%3D1 Just found this in the 'completed listings' running 30 minutes behind the link above...naughty, naughty! http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Elizabeth-I-1562-sixpence-/120987273507?pt=UK_Coins_BritishHammered_RL&hash=item1c2b674923

Another £100 pi**ed against the wall! These are also arriving again in good numbers...that's 2 in a month that I'VE spotted, so there will have been others! http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HENRY-VIII-GROAT-TOWER-MINT-/261096503046?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&nma=true&si=cCzk6X4balcL%2F1rvoWDuCX2BHjA%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

Yep. Bloody 'ell, Nick, I'm not the greatest fan of the Jubilee stuff, but that's a bit nice! Just right for colour, certainly to my taste!

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/120987052366;jsessionid=4808E8FFE400C7781B5FCC01A9F9C3B1?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D120987052366%26_rdc%3D1

These are making a bit of a comeback in their various guises! Suddenly a bit of a glut about, they've been quiet for a while! Not just a copy, not EVEN a sixpence! Sorry, Richard, but 120987052366

Welcome DJMonty, Don't feel put off by the lack of response, there appears to be a few site technical difficulties! I've been onboard over a year now, and it's never happened before, so no big deal I don't think? Anyway, I've struggled to leave you this post, as it's been difficult to move through the links but, when the site's back to normal, have a browse through the books for sale here. The Check Your Change book has been highly recommended by many for those post-decimal rarities! Could be a good starting point!

And it's still not right! Think I'm going to give up again for a while!

I couldn't open the pages at all yesterday, or first thing this morning! Oh, and hilarious, Rob!

great read, I hope you're right! Should I buy everything up now?

261094905301 Ah, no. It says VF detail. And there is one small bit of it that could be considered to be VF! (Had you thought of getting a computer Stuart? They allow you to put in links and everything!) Oh, and I might mention that this seller has previously listed three (different) replica Charles I shillings as genuine, so he either doesn't know that much about what he sells, or he does. Either way, I'd be quite cautious about buying from him. 3 replicas, you've impressively got your finger on the pulse, I must say! I do have an abacus to play with

Nice VF Charles I Shilling! 261094905301

yes intellectual copyright applies to images taken by the author of material in his possesion.....however as much as intellectual copyright exists it can be controlled by corporate copyright. an example of this is when i photograph at premier league football matches, i own the intellectual copyright of the images i capture but am governed by the rules of the premier league, an example being the number of images i can post on my personal website without having to pay for a licence. the same applies to buildings, whilst i can capture images for example on national trust land and own the intellectual copyright of those images, what i can do with those images is controlled by the national trust and what licence i may have to pay them, for earning monies from their property. it is also possible to have your intellectual copyright removed in certain circumstances, such as under the terrorism laws if you were photographing a sensative subject such as a military installation, a government office block on the north bank of the thames!!!...... youre question though is clear cut......you owned the coin, you own the intellectual copyright to the image you captured. you can publish. Many thanks, Ski, much appreciated!

Depends on the coin and whether there are two or more people desperately seeking the variety. 6 or 7 years ago I had a nice Elizabeth 1 shilling pencilled in for a bid of 5 or 600 which was about right for the prices at the time, but it went to over 2K because two variety collectors were competing. The greater the number collecting a series, the greater the likelihood that prices will exceed expectations. In your experience, have you found the Elizabeth market consistent (mostly) regarding rarities (dates/Privy, etc.), I have recently seen a couple of examples of the rarer dates/PM's (both around 1:2 according to BCW) sell for around a third higher than their lesser-dated counterparts, would you say this ties in with your own observations?

Yes. It is your picture and you own the rights. The new owner only possesses the coin, just as you would own the rights to any image of a picture you took in a public place. A building may have belonged to many people over the years, but any images of it are only copyrighted by the person who took them. If not, you wouldn't find many images in newspapers, magazines, on the tv, or anywhere else. As always, Rob, common sense prevails! Thank-you!

With regards to the hammered series, is there a calculation that is a ball-part (hope this is the term) figure to aid pricings on rarities? As an example I note that the multiples on grade typically run at X3 between VF to EF (as a very rough figure) so, is there a similar 'rough' figure for rarities where (in this example) a date is found at 1:2 of the common issue? What I'm trying to say is BCW suggest in their virtual collection of 3000 coins that, for example, a 1561 coin is twice as common as a 62 so, bearing in mind there are not many of either in top grade, can anybody speculate a percentile calculation that has been noted through personal experience? If a regular VF date of a denomination was £400, is there a figure that has some statistical integrity for a different VF date (of the same type) that is twice as rare?

Does anyone know the legal stance regarding the use of images in published works, where the photograph was taken by the author, of a coin he no longer owns? Namely, if I have an image of a coin I photographed and formerly owned, can I use it in any medium without violating the rights of the new owner?

Staggering, that slab link is a whole new lifetime of learning in itself, the NGC changes have been huge!

If your friend put 'gold coins' on the custom's form, it might draw attention. But I can't see why she would have them sent back, unless she had either failed to complete the customs form correctly, or you had refused to pay any duty due on them! Actually, in those circumstances they would probably be seized, rather than returned! I always put 'die-cast numismatic collectable' on there, it's no lie, and attracts FAR less attention!