I took a punt on these two the other day, I was fairly certain one was the real deal, the other not so much. What do you think?
(http://www.mycoinalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/australia-1979-2c-error-large-clipped-planchet.jpg)
(http://www.mycoinalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/australia-1980-2c-end-of-bar-clip.jpg)
I'd think the 1979 is real.
Not sure about the 1980 as the strike seems really clear/sharp/strong right to the edge on the reverse and the clipped / flattened edge seems to have gone beyond the normal circumference of the coin like you might expect if it had been squished later on.
I really like the hairs on the back of Lizzie's neck on the 1979 though!
Quote from: 'markn' pid='80284' dateline='1443779500'What do you think?
Fascinating errors, both of them.
Without seeing the edges...
The '79 is an odd shape, but does show the lack of detail you'd expect from that much metal missing.
The '80 I don't think is a clip. It looks to me like the planchet split after being struck, because the detail is intact. But it looks like your classic cold shut, at least from that angle, not a shed job.
Was I close? :diablo:
Yeah, I was fairly certain the first one was a genuine elliptical clip. There's strong metal flow lines all over it, I haven't seen many decimal elliptical clips so it's a good find.
The second one I wasn't really clear about. There were a couple of indicators from the sellers images that made me think it might be real but I really wasn't 100% sure. However, now that i have it in hand it's clearly a real error. Pretty sure it separated before striking. Here's a second image with some arrows pointing at areas of interest.
(http://www.mycoinalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/australia-1980-2c-end-of-bar-clip-annotated.jpg)
Nope, I was wrong with the circumference bit as I just put it into photostudio and the flattened edge fits into the circumference. Maybe a bit of an illusion there (or just my eyes).
For me the jury is still out on the 1980, but McDuck might be drawing the right conclusion.
Bloody nice finds Mark and no doubt you would have paid the right price.Are you going
to get them slabbed?
Not sure what to make of what appears to be the rim heading inwards on the 1980? (Might be just me again though).
(http://www.australian-coins.net/gallery/albums/userpics/11067/1980_2.jpg)
Quote from: 'Unicorn' pid='80291' dateline='1443782006'Not sure what to make of what appears to be the rim heading inwards on the 1980? (Might be just me again though).
I think what you're seeing is in the 3rd dimension.
Mark, any chance of some different angles on it?
Or.. wait... I have an idea...
I really need to see this in hand... Can I afford it? :angel:
Quote from: 'Unicorn' pid='80291' dateline='1443782006'Not sure what to make of what appears to be the rim heading inwards on the 1980? (Might be just me again though).
No, it's not just you. Can't really explain it either. The metal flow indicated by the red arrows have convinced me it's real and it must have separated before it was struck. The rims I can't explain.
Quote from: 'Fulvio' pid='80292' dateline='1443782608'I think what you're seeing is in the 3rd dimension.
Mark, any chance of some different angles on it?
Or.. wait... I have an idea...
I really need to see this in hand... Can I afford it? :angel:
No, you can't afford it right now as I am still in love with it.
What's your theory? What angles do you want?
Quote from: 'stevo1962' pid='80290' dateline='1443781780'Bloody nice finds Mark and no doubt you would have paid the right price.Are you going
to get them slabbed?
Perhaps. I'm still a bit hesitant about getting errors graded by PCGS, the fees are $100 or more per coin and just getting worse with the exchange rates every day. Perhaps when I am ready to sell some errors I'll think about getting a few more graded.
With regards to these two errors, I only think the 1979 is worth the effort.
Quote from: 'markn' pid='80294' dateline='1443782697'No, you can't afford it right now as I am still in love with it.
What's your theory? What angles do you want?
Damn! Never get between a man and his true love, eh? :diablo:
lets see...
Edge on, of course.
45° would help.
And maybe top down of the edge, to see the angle on that odd rim.
What I'm thinking is there are three possibilties...
The piece broke off before striking.
Or afterwards.
Or maybe during.
I can't see it as a before, because there's no metal flow to speak of.
But that rim does look odd, doesn't it? So lets try and figure out where the metal went, and why.
Quote from: 'markn' pid='80295' dateline='1443782785'I'm still a bit hesitant about getting errors graded by PCGS
Hmm, I see absolutely no value in getting something which is unique graded at all. What are they going to tell you? Its MS-whatever? So?
You
CAN'T
get
a better one!
Total waste of money unless the coin is repeatable.
Quote from: 'Fulvio' pid='80298' dateline='1443785187'I can't see it as a before, because there's no metal flow to speak of.
Look at the picture with the arrows on the reverse. The frill above the lizard's eye where the arrows are. There's a significant amount of metal flow there. Also, look at all the features in relief on the reverse that end up in the missing region of the coin (again indicated with arrows). They all taper down towards the missing region, which is fairly typical when part of the coin is missing.
The observations make me fairly certain that the missing part was actually missing when the coin was struck.
Quote from: 'markn' pid='80299' dateline='1443785874'The frill above the lizard's eye
Ah. Yes, sorry.. I had to dig up an image and compare them side by side. I see it now.
I'd still like to see that edge though. :)
Quote from: 'Fulvio' pid='80303' dateline='1443790047'I'd still like to see that edge though. :)
(http://www.mycoinalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/australia-1980-2c-end-of-bar-clip-detail-1.jpg)
(http://www.mycoinalog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/australia-1980-2c-end-of-bar-clip-detail-2.jpg)
I am wondering why there is so little sign of metal flow on this coin. Fulvio's suggestion that the missing part of the coin was there when struck explains why there would be NO metal flow. But there is definitely some. So what if the missing part was still partially attached and the attachment point deformed a little when it was struck. This would explain why there's some metal flow, but not much.
Anyone seeing this error would immediately think it's a tin snips job. It's not until you look closely that it starts to tell the story. In that respect it's never going to resell well as you need too much explanation. I think they are both real, but I have them in hand to see.
Quote from: 'markn' pid='80319' dateline='1443833138'So what if the missing part was still partially attached and the attachment point deformed a little when it was struck.
Yep. And I think the top of the first image may show the attachment point.
Notice the rough cavity right at the obverse edge? The reverse is rounded all the way down, but that tiny sliver looks to be where the missing bit hung on. Maybe it separated in the press, maybe sometime after.
Wouldn't it be cool to have it? I seem to recall a US coin which was split, and both halves were in the same bag. Found pictures while googling something else, and it was a pretty awesome find (the coin, i mean).
BTW, I'm of the opinion this coin has a bunch of siblings. Its pretty likely that cold shut extended all the way across the sheet, and an entire line of planchets were cut through it.