Options
Good images of Bad coins - Twenty Cent and Standing Liberty Quarter Type I
oih82w8
Posts: 13,317 ✭✭✭✭✭
A couple more counterfeit coins to gawk at, these two are not particularly hard to pick apart;
Thank you for your interest and comments.
oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
5
Comments
If all the counterfeits out there looked that bad, I would have fewer worries about their effect on the hobby.
http://macrocoins.com
They don't look that bad. They are "circulated," and they look better that most 19th century cast counterfeits. Back in the day before certification existed, or at least became common, pieces like this would have fooled a lot of collectors.
Thanks for sharing with us.
Agree with Bill, at least regarding the 20 center.
My first thought was genny, until I saw the reverse.
Picture trying to view it through a 2x2, with marginal lighting and a Kmart magnifier
at a small show....
The quarter I agree probably wouldn't fool too many folks, especially because a key date like that would get a lot of scrutiny anyway, and the surfaces seem a lot more obvious, along with the modified date.
One other factor is that these photos are blow-ups that show every problem. They are good photos as the title states. A lot of casual collectors concentrate on the date and the design, and might look at the coin with a 3 to 5 power glass.
Yes, these pieces don’t look good in these photos, but they are still dangerous.
i just pulled this image up from the "Coin Facts" site. Maybe the 1916 counterfeit is more dangerous than you think.
I can't tell if some the marks on the fake are raised or into the surface. Raised can set off alarm bells. One of the big issues with it are the grainy surfaces, but you can see from this genuine piece that the general "look" is out there on genuine pieces.
It is easy to spot them as fake from those pictures...at least for those of us with experience. However, I can see how a lot of new collectors could easily be taken by those. Cheers, RickO
Here are a couple of close-up pictures. First the fake which has a grainy textured surface.
And the genuine piece, which lacks detail, but with naturally smoother surface.
I noticed the grainy texture, particularly on the devices, on each of the fakes. I didn't notice this in hand so much and would have been easily fooled on a couple.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
good pics of something bogus, your right