Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Fake Identification Toolkit
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Silverlock, post: 3243232, member: 98181"][USER=56859]@TIF[/USER] Thanks for all the great feedback! I’m always looking to improve my skills. I’ll update my list accordingly. A few comments:</p><p><br /></p><p>*Warren* Etsy - Doh! Sorry Warren</p><p><br /></p><p>Die Matches are a whole subject unto themselves. My point in the list is that die matches to even a known fake aren’t necessarily diagnostic, if the fake was made from a real coin. If have seen a die match used to prove authenticity or to condemn a coin; in and of itself it does neither, except in cases where a given die is known exclusively from fakes. </p><p><br /></p><p>I will add a new line item about vague details being used to “upgrade” a questionable coin. That’s a good one! I personally use my list to determine seller trustworthiness, which I find less time consuming than worrying about each coin individually. Upgrading questionable coins, applying fake patinas, inflating positive feedback, shill bidding, and similar sharp practices doesn’t mean the seller would sell a fake, but it says enough about the seller for me to move on.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am a student of artificial aging techniques used on fakes. My line items on these, like everything else in the list, are things to consider when forming an opinion. If I see a nice hard malachite and azurite patina *in the right sequence* I conclude either the faker has studied mineralogy (unlikely), or the encrustation is real (likely). The oxides aren’t diagnostic either way. I have not (yet) seen a fake coin with active bronze disease, for whatever that’s worth.</p><p><br /></p><p>You make an excellent point about die wear affecting perceived obverse and reverse circulation wear differences. That would be especially difficult to discern on a worn coin. I have noticed fakes sometimes are more worn and flawed on the less valuable side, while the valuable side is inconsistently sharper.</p><p><br /></p><p>Signs of casting are only a bad sign for coins that aren’t supposed to be cast. I should have made that clearer. </p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks again for the feedback![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Silverlock, post: 3243232, member: 98181"][USER=56859]@TIF[/USER] Thanks for all the great feedback! I’m always looking to improve my skills. I’ll update my list accordingly. A few comments: *Warren* Etsy - Doh! Sorry Warren Die Matches are a whole subject unto themselves. My point in the list is that die matches to even a known fake aren’t necessarily diagnostic, if the fake was made from a real coin. If have seen a die match used to prove authenticity or to condemn a coin; in and of itself it does neither, except in cases where a given die is known exclusively from fakes. I will add a new line item about vague details being used to “upgrade” a questionable coin. That’s a good one! I personally use my list to determine seller trustworthiness, which I find less time consuming than worrying about each coin individually. Upgrading questionable coins, applying fake patinas, inflating positive feedback, shill bidding, and similar sharp practices doesn’t mean the seller would sell a fake, but it says enough about the seller for me to move on. I am a student of artificial aging techniques used on fakes. My line items on these, like everything else in the list, are things to consider when forming an opinion. If I see a nice hard malachite and azurite patina *in the right sequence* I conclude either the faker has studied mineralogy (unlikely), or the encrustation is real (likely). The oxides aren’t diagnostic either way. I have not (yet) seen a fake coin with active bronze disease, for whatever that’s worth. You make an excellent point about die wear affecting perceived obverse and reverse circulation wear differences. That would be especially difficult to discern on a worn coin. I have noticed fakes sometimes are more worn and flawed on the less valuable side, while the valuable side is inconsistently sharper. Signs of casting are only a bad sign for coins that aren’t supposed to be cast. I should have made that clearer. Thanks again for the feedback![/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Fake Identification Toolkit
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...