Rough Surface vs Cast Bubbles

I also wanted to comment on the use of casting pontils as a diagnostic. You must remember that the vast majority of the flans for ancient coins were cast, so the remains of pontils are quite common on unassailably authentic pieces - I would give very little weight to a casting pontil - although a casting ridge around the edge is a major diagnostic.


Granted, this is a fairly extreme example, but since (almost) all the blanks were broken off a sprue-system at some point, pontils are very common on authentic pieces.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Also, the Agrippa could be ancient and have been struck from rusted dies.

 

I fear this entire thread will be counterproductive if it causes any reader to believe that the diagnostics discussed will provide a concrete yes/no answer. Such things as the cast evidence, surfaces, styles and weights all have to be considered but none can be considered infallibly diagnostic. Learning how to weigh each bit of evidence takes a lot longer than knee jerk reactions to one. (If it does not fit, you must acquit.) I insist that you can prove a coin is fake when it fails certain tests (finding the modern dies that struck it comes to mind) but you can not prove anything does not exist or that every possible consideration has been addressed. We learn daily and make fools of ourselves with somewhat disturbing frequency.

 

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
M. K. Gandhi"
At least,if we live long enough, perhaps we someday can look forward to advancing to step two.

 

This is an interesting coin. Although it looks 100% counterfeit, IMO, it is probably OK. I would never purchase a coin like this as it will probably be hard to convince most collectors that it is genuine (remember - It may not be).

I don't think it is a cast and as @dougsmit pointed out there are many factors to weigh before making a determination. Using a photo alone is just "game playing."

Selective corrosion can leave a granular surface but this has too many pimples and is not granular. This is what a coin struck with pitted dies looks like, and that may be the case here.

The reason I do not believe it to be cast is the irregular shape of the pimples. You will not see that on a casting although "never" is a word that does not apply to numismatic authentication.

 

Hi guys

What do you think of this coin? Is the bubbles on the crown corrosion or cast bubbles?

 

Does this coin look fake

 

Hi @Vas. You asked your question in two threads separately - both very old threads. Also, based on the quality of your photo, the lack of any relevant information (weight, diameter, photo's of the edges, where did you find this coin, etc.), nobody will be able to give an answer.

Please post a separate thread with this information.

 

I don't have an opinion on this one. Authentication of any reasonably good fake requires magnification. One thing to always check on a coin suspected to be a sast c/f is the weight and specific gravity (tricky with all the fissures on ancients). Very often, besides an edge seem, their will be evidence of filing to get the weight "right."
Unfortunately, as I posted before, the good fakes are die struck - usually with a much better style, surface, and appearance than a genuine specimen.

 

Sometimes the indications are a little more obvious. I bought and sold this as a modern reproduction long ago. You might consider it an "overdate".

 

What is your evidence that this is cast? This coin is absolutely genuine. Patina is right style is consistent. It is harshly cleaned and has evidence of horn silver there is nothing wrong in this coin to condemn it as forgery.

 

@Insider, this question was posed two years ago, and the person who asked it hasn't been here since then, so it's unlikely that he or she will see your response. Although I must say I don't know how anyone could reasonably interpret your response as a "condemn[ation]" of the coin as a forgery, given your express statement that you "don't have an opinion on this one"!

 

That is an excellent site. It may be more work than many of us will put into our decisions, but it does have a clear exposition of what could be done.

Here is a fake that at first fooled me (and a Byzantine expert who collects this type and has 60).


How did I determine it was fake? Well, later, in the same batch of Byzantine coins I found six more exactly like it down to the centering and the rim flaws in the same places. Only the applied patina was not exactly the same.

 

What if these identical coins were distributed in different batches to different people? Would that mean no one would ever discover these as fakes ?

 

...Had to look up "Ultracrepidarian." I don't typically resort to this rhetorical device, but "LOL." I need it. Practicing the pronunciation.

 

...As I like to say, mixing cliche instead of metaphor, 'my two cents, for what they're worth.' Along the lines of, '...and that's all the fat lady wrote.'

 

ernstk, posted: "What is your evidence that this is cast? This coin is absolutely genuine. Patina is right style is consistent. It is harshly cleaned and has evidence of horn silver there is nothing wrong in this coin to condemn it as forgery.

I'm going to let this go as it appears that you may be from a foreign country and your English comprehension may not be the best. This is what I posted:
"I don't have an opinion on this one." I still don't in spite of your opinion.

 

You said in your post best fakes are the struck ones, so tell us how do you recognize a struck fake when the die is made by a CNC machine and copies exactly the original die? You cant say you will know from style, the die matches the exact die from genuine examples. You cant say surface as it is struck same way as ancient ones done. You cant say edge seem or filing as it's not cast. So please enlighten us, how could you know a fake struck with a die made of CNC machine?

 

1. I accept your apology for misquoting me.

2. As a professional coin authenticator for almost fifty years (including ancients), I consider myself very lucky to no longer need to authenticate ancients at a major TPGS in the USA or European bank/museum. All the way back in the 1980's the best dealers in the US were being fooled by state-of-the-art fake ancients. Counterfeit ancients are far better today and you have posted one of the reasons why.

3. I don't like your attitude so don't count on me enlightening you about anything. For the other members I will say that every technique used to authenticate ancients and every (ah, virtually every ) characteristic found on the best fakes is published if you care to look. You'll need a stereo microscope.

 

what you mean by every characteristic of fake has been published? Not all possible fakes coming out are published by IAPN. Only few has been published. The same goes for forum or forgery network. You still did not mention how you detect a fake transfer die made by CNC machines?