|
|
This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.
Welcome Guest! Register Now! It's free!Registering will remove the anchor ads and vignette (between pages) ads.
louisvillekyshop's Last 20 Posts
| Augustus Denarius (19-18 Bce): Legit Or Fake?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
 Posted 04/20/2025 2:57 pm
|
| Well I will say one thing: I agree there is nothing that says fake but eBay gives you 24 photos, of high resolution that are easy to post. This seller is going to the trouble of taking two photos then using something like Microsoft Paint to put one photo next to the other to make a single photo and then only posting one photo that is the combined result. That is very strange. Take a bunch of photos and edge shots and it all uploads for the same price easily. The person would get even more money with great edge photos etc. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Need Opinion About Authenticity Of Some Greek Coins Posted Online!
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 03/28/2025 07:38 am
|
Well as to what they are worth, if you do an advanced search on each of sold items and only look at ones that were real auctions with a low start and bid, you will know what each would get you that way. And that is the lowest number you would get as selling anywhere else, like waiting for a buyer interested on VCOINS you get high prices. If I were to list them, one at a time, starting at $1 each, and in the order you listed them, these are the numbers I'd expect:
$10 to $15
$10 to $15
$15-$20
$15-$25
$25-$45 |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Is Provenance Important? Add Value?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 02/13/2025 11:17 am
|
| After 20 years of selling coins on eBay, and starting at a dollar each no reserve so a real way to gauge results for your question on that platform, if you have the old estate tag from an auction house or known dealer, 1970's or 1980's even, yes, you add value as people know the coin was inspected by an auction house in my opinion before they sold it. And when I have a coin with tattered paper from the 19th century that is pen and ink, I think people pay a lot for that material that comes with the coin for the same reason. So maybe in an auction house it has no real difference in the value you get as you trust CNG to sell a coin to you they inspected, but from my world perspective, it makes a huge difference. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
|
| Someone's Funny Coin Listing, Not Marcus Aurelius And Probably Photoshop?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 01/26/2025 6:27 pm
|
Maridvnvm:
When you say "If you look at the reverse of my example above you can see that from about 11 o'clock to 5 o clock is the strike from one reverse die and from 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock the strike from the second reverse die." I could not agree more. And when I flip your last example I do see the SC below the emperor on horseback as well as the front hoof of the horse coming out of Victories shoulder. So I see evidence of both strikes and the full die of each. My issue of the coin in question, with the other side of these reverse dies having no evidence of being there, are just my personal issues with the coin. By the way, here is another coin of the same dealer. I think it is quite real. But tooled and patina reapplied? Just curious.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/255016115060
|
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Someone's Funny Coin Listing, Not Marcus Aurelius And Probably Photoshop?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 01/25/2025 3:52 pm
|
Maridvnvm;
Sorry, I read that incorrectly. So we are back to where we started. When you say about the reverse we should see: "evidence of two dies on the reverse.".... either the first strike or the second strike would show the standing emperor who is clasping hands with Concordia in both dies used. I don't see that at all. Maybe a cracked half of the first die with Concordia only and then they replace the die with a full one and somehow the Emperor standing just does not show up? The angle of the strike? Because if there were two full dies involved, each with a clear Emperor standing reaching out his hand to Concordia, and two full strikes on this flan, this left no image. Either under the new Concordia from the second strike from her on top of him or over the Concordia from the second strike of the Emperor on top of the first Concordia. And that has been what has bothered me from the beginning. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Someone's Funny Coin Listing, Not Marcus Aurelius And Probably Photoshop?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 01/25/2025 09:40 am
|
Maridvnvm:
To quote you first: " But what if we were to find coins where they didn't remove the coin from the first strike to insert a new blank before a second strike is made? What would this look like? We would expect a coin with a strong obverse strike or even evidence of a slight double strike on this obverse if the coin had shifted slightly on the obverse die and then evidence of two dies on the reverse.... Do we see these...? Yes. The coin above is one such coin"
Back to this coin in question, using your analysis. 1. There is a first strike with a reverse die in place. 2. The coin stays firm in the obverse position, not shifting at all. And a new reverse die is placed to strike plus a new blank die is set. 3. There is a strike. 4. You end up with the original coin that had a reverse from the first die and it's own original strike reverse having been in contact with a blank. Not sure what the blank could do to that reverse image. 5. The new blank would end up with a mirror reversed obverse image if the top coin left behind functioned in the obverse position and the lower new obverse would be whatever that new reverse was to be.
So that is my confusion and I know I must be missing something in this analysis of your scenario. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Someone's Funny Coin Listing, Not Marcus Aurelius And Probably Photoshop?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 01/21/2025 7:59 pm
|
Tanman:
Maybe we are misunderstanding each other. I am not talking about the obverse. The emperor I am speaking of is the full image of the man standing, clasping hands with Concordia. That standing emperor had to be on the first strike clasping hands. Then on the second strike, from the other die, that second standing emperor had to be on the second die clasping hands. This should be blundered with evidence of the standing emperors. But there is no hint at all of the man standing clasping hands with Concordia. How can that ever be possible as that image had to have been engraved on these dies. We both agree there are two different images of Concordia. Overstruck coins show both strikes over each other. Where is the left part of these reverse dies?
Or maybe you are correct and the strike completely removes the old strike if the flan is new enough. And the second strike was only hit on the left and thus off struck or the weight on only one side in a more glancing blow. I guess that works. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
| |
| Someone's Funny Coin Listing, Not Marcus Aurelius And Probably Photoshop?
|
|
louisvillekyshop
CCF Advertiser
United States
1253 Posts |
Posted 01/21/2025 12:37 pm
|
Tanman2001:
Well, I believe that did happen in the cases they were discussing back in the 1970s. But in this case: The coin is struck and has an image. Then the other die is over struck. And the dotted border lines up perfectly? And the emperor, who clearly must be on both dies, is not seen as even an imprint faintly on either part of the over strike? I don't think this is real. Any ancient coin, no matter how worn, always has faint traces of what was struck on it. The chances of not seeing the emperor from the first strike under the second strike or the emperor from the second strike over the first strike just does not seem reasonable for me to believe. |
| | Forum: Ancient, Greek, Roman, and Medieval Coins |
|
|
| Coin Community Forum |
© 2005 - 2025 Coin Community Forums |
| It took 0.44 seconds to rattle this change. |
 |
|
