numidan

If you are using Windows and a digital microscope for viewing your coins, then, this software maybe for you. This is the official release of Coin Expert VCV3.0 free for personal use. Much has changed from the previous release. What has changed? • The main GUI window was given a traditional window's like interface using a menu bar instead of function keys. This gives the user access to the various features and tools that Coin Expert offers. • The manual calibration was changed to an easier automatic calibration procedure. It reduces human errors introduced to improve accuracies of measurements and re-drawing of traces. Due to these improvements, previous trace saves will not load correctly. Thus, a new editing tool "Select trace" is available to make vertical and horizontal adjustments to the trace. Properly configured software will perform measurements at least 0.1mm . • A real time histogram can be displayed to properly make adjustments to the lighting and camera's settings. This should improve the quality of pictures taken. • Different ways to take snapshots of camera captured images are now available. A new tool called "Assembly" allows users to take 2 pictures (usually the obverse and reverse sides of the coins) and save it as a jpg picture file with or without a frame, landscape or portrait format. A digital zoom feature can be activated ahead of time and used to adjust the size of image to fit within the frame. • An image file can be loaded and used to make traces. Under view, the user will be able to switch between the image file and the camera's captured frames to perform real-time analysis using the traces and determine differences between them. • All setting are saved when quitting the software and are loaded when starting the software. Changes can be made through the CElanguage3.ini file. • Changes to the right click menu. • The "Comment" tool was removed in this release. Previous released version: http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/...IC_ID=149484 Get it now, no password required, just unzip it. Take time to read the PDF. No installation required. Double click on CPExpertvcv3.exe to start software. (P.S. not an April fools joke! and no viruses) http://depositfiles.com/files/z432i4u4u (follow us on: 5centscanada.ca)

Sorry, for dialog box option do not use the value of "-1" ! Just leaving it empty --> Device=

What kind of digital microscope are you using? Is it using a directx (UVC) driver? Normally the software will start and ask you to select the device. You can try manually to set the device. Locate CElanguage3.ini file and open it up with a text editor. Change value for "Device =" ... if it is 0 then 1, if it is 1 then 0 ... -1 value will show a dialog box to select a device when there are more than one. Save file and start the software. Keep me posted.

I have not seen this listed anywhere. The easiest way to determine the 4 high and left is to determine where the back tail of 4 is located compared to the denticle (see white arrowed line). The 0 is a little wide but too small to be considered. The blue line was used compare height of every digit and red rectangles used to compare digit locations. Happy hunting.

Agree. Keep as is. The coin is honest. Note also the broken serif at the bottom of the 1 in the date. And on the obverse you can see quite clearly the "honi" on the queen's shoulder - honi of honi soit qui mal y pense i.e. "Shamed be he who thinks evil of it", which seems appropriate? Almost! "Evil be to him who evil thinks" (Or "Shame", as you say, for a literal translation). Thanks Peckris. I preferred the use of "shame" in this instance to go with the theme of it being a shame to dip etc the coin. Too right! Though I wonder - has anyone actually dipped a copper? Wonder what effect it would have... I usually try to clean the verdigris off copper coins using electrolysis. But there is a risk of pitting If you want to try, do not use common salt as the electrolyte!

Either wear or a partially filled die. For some years (1920 for example) these are quite common and not generally considered collectible. I will agree with Rob and Accumulator. An extra comment: I will not pay a premium for an error that can be easily reproduced in my garage! A file, some sand paper and voila, colon disappeared.

I agree 5 over 5 there if you offset the top bar by the same distance as the bottom loop they will match. I tried the same thing and I agree with Colin that they match. The question I have, why is the lower 5 not as thick as the complete higher 5? When the digit is recut it causes metal displacement which narrows the gaps that would have previously existed... well that is my logical explanation Thank you Colin. Upon reflection, I decided to estimate the 5's highest points of the relief and this is what I came up with.

I agree 5 over 5 there if you offset the top bar by the same distance as the bottom loop they will match. I tried the same thing and I agree with Colin that they match. The question I have, why is the lower 5 not as thick as the complete higher 5?

I did not find this listed anywhere. Would you consider this as a repunched 8 or double 8?

That looks great, Numidan! The only thing that sprung to mind was how strike weakness could be factored into the equation? Superb idea though, which for the main part could work! At the end of the day a grade's a grade! Bag marks, edge knocks, etc, only affect appeal, and consequently value! Would be a very good start to get the grade right! I'm still trying to work out what the diagrams are of I'm assuming of something that someone could use in grading terms. -5 being good and -50 poor etc. I thought Derek Riley brought out a book for such requirements? Grading is always going to be subjective, no matter how we all think, we've seen it so MANNNNNNY times on this forum where we as experienced collectors do not agree, so we should basically pass that subject by and work on the rest. The diagram (section of king George V's crown on Canadian coins) was presented to prove a point, there maybe other ways to grading. It was not there to teach someone how it works, so do not assume, it is a bit more complex than that. If your method works, good for you, I respect that, but it did not work for me and I am guessing, it is not working for many others since forums are full of buyers complaining about the grade of their new purchases. How many of you, picked up a coin in your collection that you had previously graded, and wondered why you attributed that grade and changed it? That is objectivity at its best. Believe me, next time you will take the same coin, you will change its grade ... again. I was fed up always second guessing the grade. After searching the internet for Mr. Riley's book and I found an excerpt of it. It looks like a great reference book but it uses the same old methodology. People have to guess what grade their coins are, based on pictures. But the things I do liked about this book, pictures are clear and the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy. Thank you, Azda. I do agree with you that we should basically pass that subject, I am satisfied with my grading skills and do not need to prove anything to anyone. Your diagram appraoch is certainly different, and I'm sure useful especially with particular features on particular coins. But I'm surprised by your verdict on Derek's book? Far from being the ''same old methodology" it's a radical new approach using photos of all the major UK design types in various states of preservation - just the thing for a beginner, I would have thought. I'm unsure why you think it's lacking? It takes the guesswork OUT of grading, especially for beginners. Also, you say your diagram approach is to measure "die wear", but surely we are talking coin wear here, not die wear? Die wear is a more subtle thing and shows itself in the quality of the strike, but has to be judged more by the experienced eye, or a helpful dealer. You are right Peckris, I did write die wear but I meant coin wear. Sorry for the confusion. It might have not come out right but I did credit Derek's work by writing that I liked the fact that "the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy".

That looks great, Numidan! The only thing that sprung to mind was how strike weakness could be factored into the equation? Superb idea though, which for the main part could work! At the end of the day a grade's a grade! Bag marks, edge knocks, etc, only affect appeal, and consequently value! Would be a very good start to get the grade right! I'm still trying to work out what the diagrams are of I'm assuming of something that someone could use in grading terms. -5 being good and -50 poor etc. I thought Derek Riley brought out a book for such requirements? Grading is always going to be subjective, no matter how we all think, we've seen it so MANNNNNNY times on this forum where we as experienced collectors do not agree, so we should basically pass that subject by and work on the rest. The diagram (section of king George V's crown on Canadian coins) was presented to prove a point, there maybe other ways to grading. It was not there to teach someone how it works, so do not assume, it is a bit more complex than that. If your method works, good for you, I respect that, but it did not work for me and I am guessing, it is not working for many others since forums are full of buyers complaining about the grade of their new purchases. How many of you, picked up a coin in your collection that you had previously graded, and wondered why you attributed that grade and changed it? That is objectivity at its best. Believe me, next time you will take the same coin, you will change its grade ... again. I was fed up always second guessing the grade. After searching the internet for Mr. Riley's book and I found an excerpt of it. It looks like a great reference book but it uses the same old methodology. People have to guess what grade their coins are, based on pictures. But the things I do liked about this book, pictures are clear and the author did not use a one size fits all philosophy. Thank you, Azda. I do agree with you that we should basically pass that subject, I am satisfied with my grading skills and do not need to prove anything to anyone.

My response to point number 1 When I started coin collecting, knowing how to grade became my first priority. You would not believe the time I spent to figure it out. The problem is that the current grading system is purely based on objectivity. Coin grading companies exists so that the current system can be accepted by all. Think about it, we rely on one or two individuals to objectively grade the coins, during their good days and bad days, and by magic, no one will dispute the grade. When I decided to introduce a scientific approach to grading and tested it out on another forum. Within a week or so, all those that participated were able to evaluate a circulated certified coin and obtain almost the same grade within ½ a grade point. That was not bad considering that objectivity cannot be completely removed. So, I was encouraged to present this method, wow, there is a lot of resistance out there. Sample of the scientific approach giving a value to different levels of die wear. So, until an organization standardizes grading and is willing, for example, to enumerate how much bag marks are acceptable for ms65 and list required characteristics, there will always be disagreement and coin grading companies grabbing your money. Sorry for letting off some steam.

Here is a slide show that you might find interesting. http://www.usmint.gov/mint_tours/?action=vtShell

This would be true if you only have one press producing the coins and one rolling/bagging machine. Usually, when the mint is ready to produce large quantities of coins, they install the working dies in the presses. Now, if one working die has some damage or has been reworked and creating a variety, was used for a press say out of 10, then 10% of the coins would be of a different variety. Then, all the coins are sent to mamy bagging machines, making it possible that some bags have more variety coins then others.

Here is an animated gif that cycles between short and long denticle 1936 penny. I did not post it under unlisted variety because it is a close call! Maybe due to die wear? What do you think?

I have not seen this listed anywhere. The easiest way to determine the wide date is to determine where the back of second 4 is located compared to the denticle (see white arrowed line). The blue line was used compare high of every digit and red rectangles used to compare digit locations. Happy hunting.

In fact, not only does it depend on the blank being off-center but also a loss of piston pressure on the press. Here is an illustration that I presented on a French forum to help understand why on some coins, there maybe longer teeth. The first picture shows the chamber. I've exaggerated the curvature of the working dies to understand the flow of metal of the blank. The second image is to help understand that the process is similar to rolling pie dough, metal flowing to the extremities. It helps that the working dies are convex. The third image shows the contact points between the blank's rim and edge of working dies where the teeth are located. The fourth image is a magnification of the contact point between the working die and the blank’s rim. If there is a loss of pressure, metal flow will not be complete and the teeth will be longer and deeper in the blank's rim. Hope this helps

Sorry AardHawk for the late response. Here are images of a different section of the coin, hope this is okay with you.

These differences indicated by the red arrows may also be optical illusion

Well now, looks like it to me. It's not even the same 9 ! I wonder if that's common - the further right the number is, the smaller it would have to be to squeeze under the exergue. If the accidental theory is to continue to hold water, we can't have them making design changes to allow for wide dates. Doesn't make any sense... I think that's just how they are for 1899. Here are mine: (apologies for the colour of the narrow date, its a CGS photo of my slabbed coin) The new title for this post should be renamed "Date Spacing". This is a good example of two dies with different date spacing. Now, is there any other differences? Maybe you can help Accumulator, but the robe near the right side of Britannia's belly seems different

Thank you for the pictures, I am happy to see that I am not the only one looking at date spacing! Thank you Rob and Red Riley. It is true that it normally concerns the last numeral but when all numerals are affected like 1900, I wonder why. For example, we were finding many rotated dies for a specific year while researching Canadian coin varieties and discovered that during the minting of that year, the mint was on strike and it was the managers operating the press. Therefore, the probability of finding errors (varieties) for that year was higher. Now if the guy responsible had a truly attrocious hangover, there is a possibility that he may have taken the wrong matrix and a new variety is waiting to be discovered

People like to collect only dates, it is okay by me. They will have the odd variety because they are popular and really do not understand how they came about, that is okay too. I like to find differences in dies used within the same year. These differences are rare on modern die fabrication using reducing lathes and when I find them, I am happy and if it becomes popular, even happier. I take it to the next step and try to determine what may have happened. I would go crazy checking 18th and 19th century coins with the same accuracy, it is like every coin was made from a different die, but people like Freeman took the time to catalog these. So I was just curious to know if there were any changes in the manufacturing process of dies in 1901 such that no (or maybe very few) date spacing exists. Was it due to low coin mintage?

Hi les occ, There are in fact 8 different varieties of 1900 penny, all based on the shape of the '9' in the date and the position of it's foot, coupled with the spacing/orientation of the '0's. There are also reports of two other types, one where the '9' is over a border tooth and the second where the designer's initials are missing from under the bust. Sorry to bring this post back, I find it important that other people contribute to the author’s finds. I did find 8 different date varieties of 1900 penny. The rarest in my sample was the date having 10 1/2 tooth spacing with an open and skinny 9. I was suprised to see this many variations since I did not find any date spacing differences for 1901 using a similar sample size! What happened?

Saved gif images using Paint.NET by reducing top layer's transparency and combined these images using unFREEz. I do agree with you for the rim. Thank you, if I create other animations, I will increase the delay. This is the first time I present differences in coins using gif animation. It was easier to see how the denticles approaches the land near Britannia's foot. There are other small differences between them, but I am waiting to see if other members are able to find the long denticle. In my case, I only have one long denticle 1936 penny out of 17 coins.

That is one of my weakness. To get a lot of old high-grade coins, either you are very old and put them away a long long time ago, pass down from a grandfather, or you have a lot of money which none of these apply to me. I will not be able to help you on this one, the earliest british penny I have is 1891 and most are AG to VG