Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United Kingdom
  • Trading Feedback


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Stacker/Collector

My Precious Metals

  • Metals I am interested in
  • I am interested in
    Numismatics (Proof coins)
  • My current Stack/Collection is mainly
  • Whats in my stack/collection
    Bit of everything

Recent Profile Visitors

1,932 profile views

Britannia47's Achievements

  1. I understand the Pobjoy Mint stopped minting coinage for the Isle of Man in 2017. Love their sovereigns though, made from ‘yellow gold’
  2. I take your point, but I assure you that both coins are the same colour. The cameo effect is due to the infamous 'trick of the light' by allowing the camera/lense to flood the 'mirrored field' with shadow at certain angles. I will send another photo of the 2 Sovs. side by side.... As you can see the Proof actually looks slightly more pink than the Bullion. The shiny relief surface of the bullion is always going to look different from the frosting on the proof relief and therefore will interfere with the colour seen by the eye or camera lens. One of the best gold coins for colour is the 'Buffalo' It has a semi matte finish and reflects red and yellow, whilst absorbing violet and blue in the spectrum. Our copper alloyed sovereigns are so difficult to reflect their true colours, but that's what you get with 'Red' gold.
  3. The topic of Sovereign colour has been covered many times. I agree that the colour of the 2022 proof sovereigns may appear to be different, but the alloy used is the same as for the 2022 bullion sovereign. When the RM were advertising this coin, it appeared to have an overly 'pink' cast. In reality it seems quite acceptable in colour, but of course when you compare it with a 'Gillick' there is a marked difference. I hope the comparison photo illustrates that point...
  4. Jubilee Head Coinage (1887-1892/93 Failure to please? 'Grandma' Victoria was 68 years old when the Jubilee image finally replaced the 'Young-head' of an 18year old girl. Joseph Edgar Boehm, an Austrian engraver, was given the task. Queen Victoria's favourite small diamond crown sat on top of her widows cap with veil attached. It was lightweight and only 4 inches in diameter, and far more practical than the heavier regnal crown. However, bombarded by criticism that the small crown looked a bit silly, she seemed to change her mind, and the Obverse was duly replaced in 1893 by Thomas Brocks 'Old Head'. So the Jubilee coinage only lasted a very short time (6/7yrs). Again a veil was incorporated into the 'Old Head' and thus mourning carried on for 40 years! Although Prince Albert and Queen Victoria were both born in 1819 she was 3 months older, making Albert her 'Toy boy' ! He died in 1861, age 42, but not before he had enhanced his reputation as being the 'Stud of Osborne House' getting Vicky 'preggers' 9 times! Back to the 'Jubilee head' - The small diamond crown now resides on show with the Crown Jewels at the Tower of London.....
  5. My 1817 is not graded, but I'm sure its not as good as yours! Accused of being a show-off? Of course not! Mind you, some new members haven't even got 10 to chose from! My choice from your 10 would be the 1820 Crown. Unlike gold, silver over time can become more attractive. This one has superb toning. The improved version of the St G&D first appeared on the 1818 crown, but not until 1821 on the sovereign, but of course you know all this. I regard the first design as a failed prototype, but within weeks Pistrucci was redesigning that image after much criticism. Replacing the broken spear handle with the sword was a brilliant idea. I remember having discussions with Michael Marsh and others through Coin News mainly about this issue way back in 1998, but that's another story......I am not envious by the way! 🤢🤢🤢
  6. Anyone want to see a real 1974, in its original over the counter card at Barclays Bank? Yeah, go on! ....
  7. Whilst I don't collect these coins I do have signed copies of 'Indian Gold Coins' and 'Double Eagles' 1877 - 1907 by Mike Fuljenz. I met him in Beaumont TEXAS a few years ago where he runs 'Universal Coin' and consider him an expert in this field. Occasionally I refer to these books to give more information to TSF members if needed. Minted in San Francisco. Yes, you are correct about the weight = 16.718g in 900 gold, although I suspect you would have paid more for this 1914 than a 1/2oz Brit! - Superb collectors coin.
  8. Not sure where to show this topic/ photos. It maybe of interest to a guinea collector. Anyway its gold! Just been to the Bank of England Museum to try and steal a 400oz gold bar, but failed miserably. I am hoping to find scrapings under my fingernails though! A new exhibition has just opened regarding the link between the Bank of England and Slavery. It all seemed a bit politically distasteful to me. Apparently, 2 governors of the time have had their busts and paintings removed (probably thrown them in the Thames like the Bristol statues!) An enquiry is ongoing to find out any tangible links with slavery money..... Mention is also made about the BLM campaign. One item of interest was guinea gold - see photo. I left soon after, in case the thought police were monitoring me.......!
  9. I'd never seen one of these before, until it was given to me by a gold dealer in the U.S.! Not sure what its worth though - useful to a plumber maybe? 😃
  10. Great coin! I'd be surprised if anyone else on TSF has one. Well done. Thought my pics might complement yours. 🤑
  11. No doubt about it LC & Doug - you do the best detailed coin photos. with the best lighting/cameras/and lenses. I've almost stopped using using my canon, and instead leave it to my Iphone now! The resolution is good enough to see most detail when zooming, but of course lacks the macro element. My photos are raw, using natural light and hand held and only cropped. I've just taken a pic of a silver dollar for comparison. Too much manipulation seems leave a photo flat, IMO, although detailed. I like a coin to look like a coin. This is the best I could do. Any blemishes are to do with the age of the coin 1995!!!
  12. Usually I am satirical (or cynical even) when it comes to the RM, but here I felt they would have no choice but to admit they made a mistake with the wording ‘Proof Set’ I suspect this was another ‘What shall we commemorate next?’ Issue, done on the hurry up in order to sell off 300 sovereigns!. 1915 was a relatively inconspicuous year in WW1. We know it started in 1914. In 1916 was the Battle of the Somme. 1917 was Passchendaele and 1918 was the end/ Armistice. Historical military coin designs have been well represented in the past by the RM. This was simply a 100 years since 1915. I found the original blurb on the RM website to find out the issues price without success. However, to put the icing on the cake, 2015 ..”was IRBs last year on the obverse!” Wow. Now I’m being cynical!🫵😸
  13. Fairly certain these our both bullion! No frosting on the 2015 relief for a start. This is not a proof set - Well done RM! I like the idea of a refund etc, but I’m sure the RM would ‘fess’ up to a mistake on the initial label….
  14. Yep, I agree with that. The 1/2oz generally is the forgotten man, sandwiched between the 1oz and the 1/4oz- the 'Billy No-mates' of the bullion coin world perhaps! However, in proof form and in sets they may be more attractive and collectable. Having said that, in a similar vein, there's a comparison in the sovereign world with the 1989 sovereign being more popular than the double and more expensive! Actually my favourites are the 1/4 oz QBs - Can't find the proof-like 1/2oz Panda at the moment.🐼
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use