Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Larry Moran, post: 1285300, member: 4580&quot;]Mike...</p><p><br /></p><p>I can appreciate the value of the article, but noticed that many advances came after Conder Tokens.</p><p>I&#039;ve alway been amazed at the great similarity in the varieties of many Conder design varieties, for example,</p><p>the Druid tokens, or the John WIlkinson tokens, some of which were struck by Matthew Boulton and </p><p>partner James Watt at the Soho Mint.</p><p><br /></p><p>It seemed likely that some mechanical means of transferring designs, or reducing designs from larger originals</p><p>may have been employed, though little is detailed in the literature I&#039;ve read.</p><p><br /></p><p>And the similarity in designs struck by various manufacturers, and attributed to various &#039;engravers,&#039;</p><p>seems too great for some mechanical means of copying design elements was not a factor sometimes.</p><p>Yet I have been told that central designs were all engraved, actual size, in reverse, but now suspect </p><p>that may not be fully accurate.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think too of a Boulton device which was under development to mechanically copy great works of art,</p><p>(more or less an early &#039;color copier&#039; that would apply paint.)&nbsp; I read that the device was never fully</p><p>successful, in its execution, but believe some aspect of a similar technology might have been used </p><p>for engraving dies.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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