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.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world, established since 2014. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsor's topics (hidden to guests) for special deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking/collecting. 21,000+ forum members and 1 million+ forum posts. For the latest up to date stats please see the stats in the right sidebar when browsing from desktop. Sign up for FREE to view the forum with reduced ads. 

QE2 in Gold Coins - Courtesy of the Telegraph


dicker

Recommended Posts

Looks much better here than in other photographs of Gillicks. I have always thought the original design was just slightly lacking in definition around the profile of face, though a brilliant and innovative concept as a whole, and I am certainly glad to have a few examples of the actual coins. (And I have read that another artist, Owen Thomas, I think, was called in to improve Mary Gillick's efforts, which might bear out my subjective impression of the profile.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RDHC said:

Looks much better here than in other photographs of Gillicks. I have always thought the original design was just slightly lacking in definition around the profile of face, though a brilliant and innovative concept as a whole, and I am certainly glad to have a few examples of the actual coins. (And I have read that another artist, Owen Thomas, I think, was called in to improve Mary Gillick's efforts, which might bear out my subjective impression of the profile.)

My apologies: having checked my references, I find that it was Cecil Thomas (not Owen Thomas) that deserves the credit. Yet another mistake  as a result of getting older.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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