| Author |
 Replies: 57 / Views: 15,958 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
4411 Posts |
Peter THOMAS and Peter S Thomas   I'm gonna get so confused. Edited by enworb
04/22/2012 9:08 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 Australia
51 Posts |
Well one of them is obviously the other one!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
552 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
The best defence against fakes is experience.
Then you exercise that experience.
When I am considering to buy a valuable coin, I ALWAYS like to examine it in hand first, with a 10x loupe.
On the Forum here, (in this thread), the only test for consideration for the determination of a fake is the pictures. When used in comparisons, they are a powerful diagnostic tool, but any and all other diagnostic tests should be applied when buying valuable coins.
They include weighing, measurement for diameter and thickness and comparison ring tone tests with a known genuine coin, and close examination of the edge of a suspect coin.
Much more cumbersome tests include density measurement, surface examination under high power (easy to do these with a USB microscope), and if you are into a court case, crystallographic analysis and mass spectrometry.
BTW, a good quality USB microscope with magnification up to 400 x can be bought for less than $100. This is a diagnostic tool which all collectors and dealers worth their salt should now have.
Without these tests, I am happy to buy from an experienced dealer who has a well established reputation with a vested interest to protect.
Edited by sel_69l
04/22/2012 10:16 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
51 Posts |
Thank you to all who participated. I've set out a summary below of the various opinions for each coin as best as I can interpret what was written.
......................................coin.1....coin.2.....coin.3.....coin.4....coin.5....coin.6
opinion.1..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.2..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.3..........................real........fake.......real........fake?.....real........fake
opinion.4..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.5..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.6..............................................................................diff..G
opinion.7..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.1.revised...............real........fake.......real........fake.......NZ.obv....fake
opinion.8..........................real?....................real..................................fake
opinion.9..........................real........fake.......real........fake.......real........fake
opinion.10........................real........fake.......fake.......fake.......fake........fake
Some of the criteria that were used such as MELB different (I presume this has to do with serifs & blocky letters), shape of the dot between IA and M & sharp nose (I'll need to look more closely at that one) are interesting. As Peter S Thomas hints at, the King's cloak not going all the way to the rim is a definite indication of a fake.
1 Real -- Yes Peter THOMAS, it is pretty heavily cleaned but not nearly as noticeably as in the scan but cheaper for it.
2 Copy -- it would be unusual & suspicious to find a real Centennial florin that was this worn.
3 Real -- My best example -- I bought this for my father for about $25 for Christmas around 1968. He was unusually speechless -- I'd hidden it in a stack of other 2/- for him to examine as a present as I was a poor student at the time & the price amounted to about a fortnight's scholarship payment.
4 Copy -- The best copy & it looks better & more silvery than the scan.
5 Only half real -- the obverse is an authentic NZ 1933 florin paired with authentic reverse. Notice how on actual Centennial florins the vertical stroke of the last R in EMPEROR lines up with a rim bead whereas for the NZ florin it aligns with a gap. Also, the sloping leg of the R's on the NZ florin are pointed by having a curved side whereas on the Centennial florin that leg of the R is cut off square. Anyway, the NZ coin has 112 obverse beads whereas the OZ coin has 108. CoinManTim's observation re the position of the G is definitive for this. wwww picked it correctly.
6 Copy -- Yes Peter THOMAS, the worn nature of 2 & 6 is a bit of a giveaway.
Actually 2 & 6 had COPY stamped into the obverse (though 4 didn't) so I doctored the images as I thought that would be too much of a clue.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1040 Posts |
Quote:
& sharp nose (I'll need to look more closely at that one) To me they're different,as I said it jump straight off the scan when you can compare like that,the bottom of the Kings Nose to Moustache is also different,hard to explain but a larger gap or slightly different Mo,not sure which. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
59 Posts |
4 is fake 5 is nz as already said
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
I agree with Sel . Quote:
The best defence against fakes is experience.
An image is a great tool to determine the quality of a coin but some of the fakes are easily determined by weight, measurement, magnets,and simply design comparison and this can only be done by examining the coin in hand. These Melbourne Centennial florins are notorious for being faked. I bought mine a few years ago from a trusted dealer and it passed all the tests, It may not be the greatest centenary florin but it is genuine. I only bought it because I needed it to round out my florin set, I have no great respect for the deign of this coin, I consider the design to be pretty lame personally. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
243 Posts |
Quote:
I bought mine a few years ago from a trusted dealer and it passed all the tests, It may not be the greatest centenary florin but it is genuine.
I only bought it because I needed it to round out my florin set, I have no great respect for the deign of this coin, I consider the design to be pretty lame personally. Same deal with me as well. Never been a fan of the centenary florin, I just needed it to round out my pre-decimal type set. |
|
Valued Member
Australia
51 Posts |
Actually, I've always liked the design (tho' not as much as the Canberra) which I think was imaginative & innovative for the time especially when compared with that of the 1951 & 1954 commemoratives which I find rather sterile.
|
|
New Member
Australia
12 Posts |
The first,third, and fifth have the same flared charachers in FLORIN, the second, forth, and sixth have straigh characters and the general lettering is thicker
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
51 Posts |
Yes all the lettering on the authentic coins is more delicate with definite serifs whereas on the copies it looks more blocky.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1607 Posts |
Well 2 & 6 are really obvious poor Fakes & I would suggest are from the same manufacture as they are almost identical,the flames & dots around the riders head area are very poor & the lack of a left hand is a dead giveaway. #2  #6  4 The font on the legends is to thick especially the MELB,the top of the B is bigger than the bottom whereas with the real coins the top of the B is slightly smaller,not enough gap between the bottoms of the letters also.  Edited by appleangel07
04/24/2012 10:18 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
243 Posts |
Just out of curiousity guys, what should the diameter be on these coins and what is an acceptable margin or error. I am thinking of upgrading my old one and I dont want to fall for a fake.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1607 Posts |
28.5mm & as far as I know there is no acceptable margin.
|
| |
Replies: 57 / Views: 15,958 |
First Page
Posted 04/22/2012 9:45 pm
