1860 Bronzed Proof Penny

[cathrine 70]

I've recently acquired a proof 1860 Victorian penny. It's a Freeman 4 specimen that's graded PF 66 Bronzed by PCGS. I've tried to find a provenance for this coin, but I've been unsuccessful. Can any of the "Penny Experts" help me in this regard?

[1949threepence 3,367]

Beautiful coin. No idea on it's origin. Absolutely flawless.

Neat capture.

 

  

 

[Coppers 58]

Absolutely stunning coin.  Congratulations!

[copper123 1,486]

Amazing to see its lasted 156 years in that grade - it must have had many careful owners

[1949threepence 3,367]

Just thinking, a coin like that must surely have some provenance. You could try tracking back, beginning with whoever yoiu bought it from - to see where they got it from.

Did you buy it through an auction house?  

[cathrine 70]

I bought the coin from Atlas Numismatics. As suggested, I'll contact the seller and inquire about its prior owner(s).

[azda 979]

I think vickysilver mentioned

that Atlas bought quite a few from

a Spink America sale about 18-24 months ago, try that sale

[secret santa 2,325]

It looks very like the one sold at Spinks in June this year - lot 1513. Some spots in the same place.

[secret santa 2,325]

Spink photos really don't do justice:

[secret santa 2,325]

The camera never lies ?????????????????

[azda 979]

55 minutes ago, secret santa said:

The camera never lies ?????????????????

I don't think that's the same one. If you look at the REV there seems to be a nick in the field between the 2 Ns in Britannia just to the left but not on Catherine's. Also what appears to be some lines on the Spink coin on the neck, however I do concede that some spotting looks familiar on both. Conserved perhaps?

Edited November 6, 2016 by azda

[Rob 3,152]

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Spink photos really don't do justice:

Just a personal opinion, but showing up marks is the point of illustration. I'd be happy buying the Spink image when they don't show in hand, but less happy buying the 'nice' one only to find that the image had been doctored.

[terrysoldpennies 763]

Underneath the D in D G  there's a Mark , and its present on both coins , I think they are the same penny .   Terry

[Rob 3,152]

4 minutes ago, azda said:

I don't think that's the same one. If you look at the REV there seems to be a nick in the field between the 2 Ns in Britannia just to the left but not on Catherine's 

Too many spots in agreement. Also the marks at 12 o'clock on the reverse agree. Depending on how the image pans out, some you see and some you don't.

[PWA 1967 2,135]

I think its the same coin and well found Richard 

[Michael-Roo 781]

Same coin….

 

[1949threepence 3,367]

1 hour ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Underneath the D in D G  there's a Mark , and its present on both coins , I think they are the same penny .   Terry

Yep, definitely the same coin. The Atlas picture has been doctored, with only the most obvious blemishes showing up - it does look too good to be true.

Well spotted, Richard. The camera is, in fact, telling whoppers. 

 

[Nick 329]

29 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

The Atlas picture has been doctored, with only the most obvious blemishes showing up - it does look too good to be true.

Those are the official PCGS pictures, not Altas.  Looks like they've used a rose-tinted filter.

[azda 979]

So where's the nick in the field?

[cathrine 70]

I'd like to express my thanks to everyone that participated in this discussion.

The Spink auction coin is undoubtedly the coin being offered by Atlas Numismatics, and the Spink vs. PCGS photographs are quite different. Naturally, no matter how accurate or inaccurate they are, photos will never replace a hands-on examination.

I do have a 14 day return privilage from Atlas, so I'm glad that the final decision will depend on my evaluation of the actual coin rather than the photographs.

[Coppers 58]

It will be interesting to learn which  photograph you think the actual coin most resembles.

[PWA 1967 2,135]

5 minutes ago, Coppers said:

It will be interesting to learn which  photograph you think the actual coin most resembles.

Comparing them both and having purchased coins from Spink i would imagine somewere between the two.

Which would still be a really nice coin 

Edited November 6, 2016 by PWA 1967

[Michael-Roo 781]

2 hours ago, azda said:

So where's the nick in the field?

If photoshopped out that would be a big 'no-no'.

[Michael-Roo 781]

Maybe its a strand of fibre?

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Its definately the same coin,its not like there are hundreds of them.

it does make you think about buying a coin from the pictures from  America and after all the fees involved on a coin of this value weather you would be happy when it arrived .

Atleast with the Spink photo they dont hide anything.