Some of my British Coins - new pictures

[azda 979]

we have all been there.

Take Dave's 1902 Proof Florin for example!

1911

[azda 979]

i've found a proof first sold at baldwins, described as the following

Great Britain, BRITISH COINS. Victoria (1837-1901) Victoria, Proof Halfcrown, 1850, young head left with two plain fillets in hair, plain truncation, date below, rev crowned quartered shield of arms within wreath, edge milled (Davies 575; ESC 685 R4; S 3888). Attractively toned, good extremely fine and extremely rare. ex Colin Adams, Spink Auction 161, 1 December 2005, lot 684

Estimate: £2500-3000

Wow, thanks a bunch for that. I've never seen one before. Without a hi-res picture, it's hard to compare to mine, but at first glance it looks a lot like the 1853 that another post linked. So again most likely mine is not a proof based on the sharpness of the reverse Irish shield for the most part. Now I can say I've seen an 1850 proof! Know what it sold for?

Checking on the Baldwins website and previous results it only stretches back until 2006 unfortunately, Rob might be the man to ask for the results of this sale.

[Rob 3,152]

In Colin's sale it made £2200 hammer graded as good EF

[Coinery 1,153]

we have all been there.

Take Dave's 1902 Proof Florin for example!

1911

Ah, yes!

[VickySilver 830]

A trip to the PCGS headquarters in Orange County, California might be a nice trip if you call and ask. Maybe a tour???

I have had some disagreements with their main grader as they have missed a few types and even grades for that matter. Nice holders though, LOL!

[marvinfinnley 4]

I've been told that you cannot do drop-offs at their headquarters unless you're a dealer with a large consignment. So I'm not sure they'd let me in the door.

[VickySilver 830]

A call might suffice, especially if you have submitted before. They generally are at least personable.

I never try to put my opinion above anybody else's and do have to state that I have not held the coin but would say that yours would very likely be a proof despite areas of softness. In general the surfaces appear immaculate and despite the reverse softness presents with an excellent strike - far above the very attractive NGC MS65 I know (which is the very nicest true currency strike I've seen). IMO, yours is superior to the Baldwin specimen overall.

[brg5658 111]

A call might suffice, especially if you have submitted before. They generally are at least personable.

I never try to put my opinion above anybody else's and do have to state that I have not held the coin but would say that yours would very likely be a proof despite areas of softness. In general the surfaces appear immaculate and despite the reverse softness presents with an excellent strike - far above the very attractive NGC MS65 I know (which is the very nicest true currency strike I've seen). IMO, yours is superior to the Baldwin specimen overall.

I would call PCGS a lot of things, but "personable" is not one of them.

[VickySilver 830]

Ha ha....They are all business at times & britches get a bit big...I'm going to jack up one of the graders pretty soon & will notify of results...

[Coinery 1,153]

Ha ha....They are all business at times & britches get a bit big...I'm going to jack up one of the graders pretty soon & will notify of results...

That's the kind of bold experiment required IMHO, would get the intelligent hobbiest back on track! Viva la VS

[marvinfinnley 4]

Ha ha....They are all business at times & britches get a bit big...I'm going to jack up one of the graders pretty soon & will notify of results...

I'm not sure what this language means especially coming from a woman (I assume VickySilver is a woman), but just the way you say it...I'm interested in the results too.

Edited October 29, 2014 by marvinfinnley

[Peckris 579]

Ha ha....They are all business at times & britches get a bit big...I'm going to jack up one of the graders pretty soon & will notify of results...

I'm not sure what this language means especially coming from a woman (I assume VickySilver is a woman), but just the way you say it...I'm interested in the results too.

The clue's in the name...

[PWA 1967 2,135]

Made me smile that vicky

[azda 979]

Ha ha....They are all business at times & britches get a bit big...I'm going to jack up one of the graders pretty soon & will notify of results...

I'm not sure what this language means especially coming from a woman (I assume VickySilver is a woman), but just the way you say it...I'm interested in the results too.

Vickysliver means victorian silver, VIcky is short for victoria, she is a male lol

[brg5658 111]

[VickySilver 830]

Last I checked, I had a couple and not "metro". LOL

Welcome to send cute daughters this way! Ha ha....

I just like Victorian coins as Dave said.

I found a "mechanical error" by PCGS on a 3d coin, and will not yet reveal what I have in mind but will try to catch them out if I can.

[Peckris 579]

Last I checked, I had a couple and not "metro". LOL

Welcome to send cute daughters this way! Ha ha....

Ahem. Get in line. At least I'm unequivocally a Chris.

Oh wait...

[marvinfinnley 4]

Last I checked, I had a couple and not "metro". LOL

Welcome to send cute daughters this way! Ha ha....

I just like Victorian coins as Dave said.

I found a "mechanical error" by PCGS on a 3d coin, and will not yet reveal what I have in mind but will try to catch them out if I can.

My profuse apologies!! Didn't get the "nomme de guerre" (your battle name) significance.

[marvinfinnley 4]

I'm with you - I like the "Vicky" portraits, even the Jubilee. Just saw the crown jewels at the Tower (a few weeks ago), so I saw the crown depicted on the Jubilee coinage, and it's not so bad.

[Peckris 579]

I'm with you - I like the "Vicky" portraits, even the Jubilee. Just saw the crown jewels at the Tower (a few weeks ago), so I saw the crown depicted on the Jubilee coinage, and it's not so bad.

It's the crown on the JH portrait that makes it look silly (IMO) and is why that portrait was so unpopular at the time. You might be interested in this adaption I did in Photoshop, showing it without the crown (apologies for the JPEG artefacts):

To my mind, it looks more dignified. Also, in Peck there is a plate showing a pattern for a bronze JH portrait where she's wearing the same crown as on the Old Head bust, i.e. much lower on the head - it looks so much better.

Edited October 30, 2014 by Peckris

[Michael-Roo 781]

I'm with you - I like the "Vicky" portraits, even the Jubilee. Just saw the crown jewels at the Tower (a few weeks ago), so I saw the crown depicted on the Jubilee coinage, and it's not so bad.

It's the crown on the JH portrait that makes it look silly (IMO) and is why that portrait was so unpopular at the time. You might be interested in this adaption I did in Photoshop, showing it without the crown (apologies for the JPEG artefacts):

JH %22artists impression%22.jpg

To my mind, it looks more dignified. Also, in Peck there is a plate showing a pattern for a bronze JH portrait where she's wearing the same crown as on the Old Head bust, i.e. much lower on the head - it looks so much better.

Like it Chris. Certainly looks better than the original.

[VickySilver 830]

Uhhh, I like the Young Head iterations! Esp. in the copper penny format! My favourite may be the 1839 proof penny if well preserved. That Jub. crown looks like something that belongs on a little girl's birthday cake....

[marvinfinnley 4]

Well of course Wyon's YH is a masterpiece - I wouldn't dispute that. However, when you see the Jubilee crown up close, you realize how beautiful and delicate it is. That changed my perception of the JH coinage quite a bit. It's just that the engraving might have been done a bit better to size the depiction of the crown a bit more so it doesn't look so out of place atop Victoria's head. Looking at the regular crown, it's a bit over the top in person, so I can understand that Victoria might have preferred the small crown for state functions. You have to see them in person to understand.

[Peckris 579]

Well of course Wyon's YH is a masterpiece - I wouldn't dispute that. However, when you see the Jubilee crown up close, you realize how beautiful and delicate it is. That changed my perception of the JH coinage quite a bit. It's just that the engraving might have been done a bit better to size the depiction of the crown a bit more so it doesn't look so out of place atop Victoria's head. Looking at the regular crown, it's a bit over the top in person, so I can understand that Victoria might have preferred the small crown for state functions. You have to see them in person to understand.

It's actually chronicled that Victoria refused to sit for the portrait wearing the heavy State Crown, preferring the lightweight 'perched-on-top' thing that made her an object of ridicule, much to the annoyance of Boehme whose original design - which may have looked something like my Photoshopped version - was indeed a dignified portrait.

There are two flaws with this story though - one, she DID pose with the larger crown, hence the bronze penny pattern shown in Peck; once executed, that design could have been used for all denominations. Why wasn't it? And second, she did wear the big heavy crown for the Old Head portrait.

[marvinfinnley 4]

I think the JH isn't so bad when it looks like this: http://www.omnicoin.com/coins/946558.jpg

or like this: http://www.omnicoin.com/coins/994431.jpg