RWB

Looks nice, Mark. I'd also favor a somewhat larger image of the 500 Won, and also visually centering your name under the image. Roadbike has conveyed some very useful information not only for authors and readers, but for those who prepare and judge educational exhibits.

Unusual circulation find even in a bank...Too bad there is no "S" mintmark!

Stacking sharp, high resolution images can be very useful in identifying repunched characters and the oblique version creates an interesting way to improve visual examination of field-to-relief intersections. But, proof comes from empirical measurements, not someone "assuming" one image is exactly 10 micrometers different in altitude from another. This is simply identifies an absences of scientific rigor on the part of the camera user and any sponsoring entity. (PS: The relief of every die made from the same hub are not necessarily identical. Slight difference in metal hardness, pressure, metal flow, etc. cause small variations. I suggest, but have not tested, that if one takes 25 new 1942-P cents all from the same hub, they will all have differing relief. The range might easily encompass sufficient to include any claims of discovery of a "high relief" coin from normal hub. It is physically impossible.)

The following link takes you to a neat thread, "Results with new camera and objective lens," on PCGS concerning high quality detail images accomplished by stacking. There are a lot of uses for these. (They were initially popularized by Dr. Mark Goodman in his book on coin photography.) https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1089671/results-with-new-camera-and-objective-lens There is one false claim in the original post: "I was also able to prove that a 1942 Pattern Cent was in fact a high-relief strike, the only one known for the Lincoln Cent series. To do these renderings, I need to take images at small increments, typically 10 micrometers. This gives me the ability to measure the heights of the features, and I was able to show that the Pattern Cent had higher relief than either the Business Strike or Proof from same year. That study was published in the Numismatist a few years back." The claim is false because selection and layer separation are manually approximated; that is, not accurately measured by standard technology. Thus, the claimed results are not repeatable. Also, all of the versions come from the same hub, which cannot produce both normal and high relief. A standard profilometer (such as a Keyence 3D) can make such measurements and provide empirical results, but when challenged several years ago this was refused. (PS: The coin in question is NOT a PATTERN - it is an experimental piece correctly described and illustrated in my book of WW-II Pattern and Experimental Pieces.)

It's also the right person. It is a contemporary portrait of Anna ("Nanny") Williams.

Counterfeits turn up in mint correspondence as ways to defraud the public on the face value of a coin versus it's legal metal content of gold and silver. Many of these involved removing precious metal from authentic coins: sweating, drilling, tumbling, vertical edge shaving, etc. The proportion of complete counterfeits seems smaller -- possibly 30 percent? For minor coins, nickels and 3-cent CuNi were commonly complete replacement counterfeits. In the 1930s alterations were very uncommon and complete fakes dominated. Coin popularizes like Mehl also informed crooks about coins that required simple alterations to boost value. During and after WW-II counterfeit gold pieces were made in an attempt to skim profit from widely exchanged coin types. Few collector counterfeits show up until the mid-1950s when prices on collectors coins began to increase. Among 19th century coin collectors and dealers, the concerns focused on counterfeits of known rarities, electrotypes deliberately sold as genuine, and invented ancient coin types. Many counterfeits from the 19th and 20th centuries can be identified by elemental analysis.

All of those are common specialty content covers. They are good at getting attention from someone looking for a book on a specific coin type. The redundant "$20 Double Eagle" is a typical example. Something like this one. below, avoids specific content by substituting a well known design to attract attention from a wider potential audience. The ambiguity is intentional. (I don't like the name block at the bottom, but there were few options. Also, a bleed between image and text would have softened the transition and been better.) This next one was adopted for its complete simplicity and connection between image and subject. (Even the title text is silver-gray color.)

An optimum design would compel action: buy the book and read it. A good design would encourage attention and possible examination.

The independent grading businesses promised consistency. They have failed. They are so inconsistent that learning to grade coins, circulated or uncirculated, is not only difficult but the "rules" change almost monthly. There are no true empirical standards, and the lie of "market grading" simply means that greed has tainted what were supposed to be fact-based professional opinions. A result is that collectors must now settle on their individual opinion of "grade" and how that relates to value. TPG opinions continue to roll downhill. I don't know when bottom will be reached.

FYI "proof-like" is not a grade. It is a subjective description of the clarity of reflection off the fields of a coin.

...or possibly the real Quintus Arrius, who was Praetor in 72 BC.

Ebay is a good venue for the two coins mentioned. Bidders are mostly simpletons who overpay for a "story" or suggestion of something unusual like a "low ball" set candidate.

PS: The Eid Mar coin is not as rare as the design I posted. Why it generated a price of $4.2 million escapes me.

From Artnet News -- "The Dealer Who Sold the World’s Most Expensive Coin Has Been Arrested for Falsifying the $4.2 Million Artifact’s Provenance" "An ultra-rare Roman coin set a world record when it was auctioned off for nearly $4.2 million three years ago. But now, the validity of that record is under question after an investigation revealed that the artifact and others were sold with forged provenance certificates, according to a report from ARTnews. The record-setting coin, called the “Eid Mar” (or “Ides of March”), was minted in 42 B.C.E. to commemorate the assassination of Julius Caesar and is just one of three known examples cast in gold. "Offered at an October 2020 event held by the London-based auction house Roma Numismatics, the coin carried a £500,000 ($650,445) presale estimate. Also featured in the sale was a 2,400-year-old Sicily Naxos coin, which fetched $291,682. But a probe spearheaded by the U.S. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agency found that both coins were offered with falsified provenance documentation. Richard Beale, Roma Numismatics’s owner and managing director, was arrested in New York earlier this year for his role in orchestrating the fraudulent scheme. "Beale now faces charges of grand larceny in the first and second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the first and second degree, conspiracy in the fourth degree, and scheme to defraud in the first degree." Article continues on original site. https://news.artnet.com/art-world/roma-numismatics-coin-dealer-richard-beale-arrested-fake-provenance-2269635

The engineering is in making the blanks. In high quality work, the two parts are cut with slightly angled mating edges... kind of like this on the inner edge of the outside (ring) piece: < and this on the edge of the inside (core) piece: > . The two are pressed together to form a planchet and then struck on a normal press. For routine work, the ring and core are cut with normal edges, then pressed together and struck. In both situations, there is sufficient metal flow to lock the two parts together. The second method being less secure, results in the core occasionally falling out. The latter method was used for 19th century composite tokens such as the Eutopia and Bickford pieces, and for the 18th century US silver center Birch cent (although here the copper hole was drilled, not die cut). There is a short discussion on pages 87-88 in my book Fads, Fakes and Foibles under the term "bimetallic."

I had no input on that cover. It was just a copy of the Morse Collection vanity book.

I really should have written "composite coin." Bi-metallic implies an alloy of two metals as in the phony "Goloid" nonsense. Composite means a coin made of two or more distinct parts, each of a different material. Modern manufacturers, however, usually call their products "bi-metallic."

The two Liberty designs for Renaissance were made by artist Jane Waldron after WW-1 era posters. The TR cover was designed my me based on a cover of Puck magazine. The FMTM cover was also my design using a woodcut from one of Evans' books about the US Mint. (The MTM-2 cover uses a similar design but a different woodcut. The large "2" is awkward, but I felt it necessary to clearly separate it from the first book.)

Your carbon frame bike broke? Yikes! Sorry to hear that.

It's not a "doubt." The thing lacks all the characteristics of a normal Athenian "owl." It's a jewelry knock-off, noting more. The "certificate" posted is not of the same item, so unless you can post the identical item in a certified holder from PCGS or NGC you are caught in you "misunderstanding" and that is the end.

Occam didn't have a razor -- he had a full beard.

Here's a link to the post I mentioned.

How about providing some empirical measurements from a surface profilometer -- similar to the images I posted about a year ago.

This is exactly what a book cover design does....or should do. Simple coin hobby book covers are commonly a picture of a coin - usually one featured inside. But cover art can also go beyond the superficial (well a little bit) to help the potential reader consider other aspects of the subject. The Renaissance books do this through two contemporary depictions of Liberty, and one of TR "in charge" steering the ship of state. I feel this is a subliminal message to look further in the book.

[This was copied from another thread because it might be of interest to more collectors. The subject was why I used a stark white background for the Saudi Gold book cover.] To me, roadbike asked a reasonable question to which I gave a reasonable and truthful answer. It's a useful kind of question because it's part of design and color which are important factors in attracting attention and in presenting the author's attitude and approach to the subject. Several years ago, while working on the CD-book, Silver Dollars Struck Under the Pittman Act of 1918, I was trying out different cover designs. The first was of a Colorado silver mine, albeit, abandoned. It was a stark but eye catching image....,much as melted silver dollars were a reminder of a era past. Yet, as I looked more closely, the design was cluttered -- too many parts and shapes. It was also ominous in rust and gray. Colors and triangular image were excellent, but.....it was not "right" for the subject. So I went back to WW 1 designs and looked for stronger symbolism. I found that in a poster showing an American eagle placing a crown of laurel ("victory") on the British lion's brow....wasn't our Pittman Act part of that victory, part of supporting our allies, part of rewarding freedom over totalitarianism? (Will America be able to crown a free Ukrainian tryzub with laurel in the same manner?) The original was black and beige - no other color. I recolored the laurel and mimicked the eagle's head color with a darker shade background. The composition is direct, simple and evocative of respect and shared responsibility. Here, roadbike's suggestion made perfect sense emphasizing a tight vertical column ending with broad eagle wings. Roadbike and Quintus each make valid points, and it's nice for me to have an opportunity to delve into how and why I choose certain cover designs.