RWB

Ed Trompeter - no connection to fascists and liars of similar name.

"War Series" cent design is from the description of plastic pieces that were produced. No examples are known to have survived. This is the only true WW-II pattern piece.

Doesn't matter what the slab label says -- it's what your bank account says that counts.

Yep, you're certainly right, there.

I had no input. Heritage handled that by recycling their internal book design.

Polishing was done the same way and the dies always began as ordinary items. A TPG could establish ranges for authentic Master and proof coins based on date if they wished. But I doubt it would make much difference. There are superbly reflective Master coins from the 1830s, and there are dull proofs from the 1890s. It wouldn't matter for PL since they originated incidental to die repair, not intentional mirror-like polishing.

All the UHR $20 are patterns and all were made the same way -- except, the plain edge version did not get the lettered edge strike. Most patterns were made as "proofs" so all of these must be also.

Bill, I recall Boulton made about 1 million into 1805 but with the 1804 overstrike....but my memory might not be accurate. Have you checked the references in John Kleeberg's "The International Circulation of Spanish-American Coinage and the Financing of the Napoleonic Wars." or E. M. Kelly: Spanish Dollars and Silver Tokens. An Account of the Issues of the Bank of England 1797-1816? (Kelly uses mostly secondary sources, however.) Did Doty have additional information in his book Soho Mint and the Industrialization of Money? The Bank of England Archives are open for research and that is likely the best source.

I've explained before -- aim a small laser beam at several spots on the obverse and reverse; measure the coincident reflection contrast (i.e. correlation between beam and reflection); record results. The set-up and calibration is simple --- begin with the highest quality proof, then PL, then lower-PL all according to the TPG's visual opinions. These become the standards for each category of reluctance with appropriate +/- range. Once calibrated the system will evaluate results for each new submission and assign a category of the coin. This is independent of bias and opinion -- except that the original calibration is a representation of opinion. Measurements could be made through plastic slabs, although it would require calibration for each type of plastic and the angle of coin to laser beam. Results will be consistent, repeatable, and objective within system calibration.

I try to tie the cover images to the book's theme and to specific content if I can. In some instances it works and in others it is too subtle or simply not visually distinct. In the following instance, I eliminated everything except the main subject (Anna Williams):

The sadly frustrating part is that technology can eliminate all the guessing and squabbling.

I agree that some will eventually learn -- but they learn to match unstable numbers to indefinite conditions, essentially a no-win situation. A go-to telescope mount is close to automated star-hopping, but with RA and Dec far more accurate than any amateur telescope could show without encoding and digital readout. Also, the target galaxy or star is always at the same coordinates, even during an astronomy "Star Party." In coin grading, the target is always moving because there are no standards, as there are in astronomy.

If it was, why didn't the dealer submit it for regrading? Nope. The fellow with merely "lying and trying" to sell an overpriced coin.

The beginning collector also doesn't bother to learn about grading coins -- and some of the so-called dealers could care less. The present situation also discourages buyers and sellers from making a close examination of coins they handle. Edges get ignored, too.

If you mean for the WW-II pattern book, I did. Jane gave me some suggestions on the final design -- fonts, positioning, etc.

The easiest to see is disturbance of the fields - this comes from handling.

Jane W. designed the covers for Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915 and RAC 1916-1921 based on two WW-I Red Cross posters. I did the RAC 1905-1908 cover based on a magazine cover. Jane also offered comments and suggestions on the other book covers including these: Several of the more recent books have "coiny" covers -- ones that feature photos of the kinds of coins described in the books. I'm not a fan of this approach, but it attracts attention of collectors and gives them a better idea of the contents.

Numismatics is very slow to change. The internet has made change more difficult. Anyone can copy and paste from one obsolete reference to something "new" in 3-clicks of a tailless mouse, thus perpetuating false information.

What you want is available at the same price as the "slip-n-slide" versions with noticeable rubbing - called "wear." Look at as many DE as you can...in person, no photos. You will have to be very patient and careful, and learn how to recognize inferior Saint-Gaudens double eagles. This approach will also produce the best value for your money. CAC means nothing except that JA and friends would like to buy your coin. (Some places have piles of excuses for calling worn DE "uncirculated" or "mint state." These are all moldy bologna. DE were packed tightly in bags to avoid wear, and when fresh from a new bag are just as nice as the Liberty coins you see from ship wrecks or small hoards. Abrasion comes from handling in banks, reserve vaults, etc.

Print is the only time-stable medium. I have 2 books in digital-only format. Annual Assay Commission – United States Mint, 1800-1943 is on 4 DVDs, and Silver Dollars Struck Under the Pittman Act of 1918 is on a CD. Sales have been very limited compared to print books. These were published 12 and 11 years ago, respectively, and the formats are considered obsolete by some.

The illustration is of the CD. The bright colors were chosen to discourage anyone from trying to sell the CD separately.

Without an empirical-based standard that is generally accepted, the numbers are not meaningful and cannot be enforced. (I vaguely recall a court case long ago, before numbers, and back when the ANA Guide was the de factor standard, of someone being convicted of fraud for gross overgrading.) Collector's only redress is to the TPG and its opinion.

Here's one of the most complicated covers to design. The background image is this one: Illustration: “A Patrol in Action,” by Sgt. Howard J. Brodie, 1944. The graphite and crayon drawing shows soldiers on patrol in the jungle during the World War II Battle of Guadalcanal. On that are illustrations of WW-II experimental pieces using drop shadows to add visual depth.... With title and author text and background shadow over laid on everything else. I really liked Sgt. Brodie's sketch -- full of action and character. I tried many different positions for the coins, including removing them entirely. But every coin person I asked said that the coin images were critical to attracting collector attention....So they stayed. I took care to make sure the two faces visible in the original remained visible in the cover adaptation.

The mine photo was also an option for a CD of the Pittman silver dollar production records. But the American Eagle placing a laurel wreath on the British Lion ended up being the better. The image is based on a WW-I Victory poster from the British Museum.

The numbers are, in reality, meaningless - they have no standard definition, so any "number" can be anything. Several court decisions reinforce that -- NGC, PCGA, ANACS numbers are just as valid/invalid as NNC, SEGS, FSLS, or any other numbers. That is pathetic.