New variant for the Belgium 1916 10 Centimes?

42 publicações

» Acesso rápido à última publicação

I found this coin on E Bay ( No Dots before or after date) and I was wondering if this would be considered a new variant for the Belgium 1916 10 Centimes.


https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces514.html





Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
I think I can see one of them on the left. You are sure they are not just worn?
Catalogue administrator
Citação: "Jarcek"​I think I can see one of them on the left. You are sure they are not just worn?
It does look like a faint hint of a dot - but - also the two dots above the E in Belgie is missing too.​
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
yes, they are hiding here :)
Citação: "Dato Mikeladze"​yes, they are hiding here :)
Hard to believe that much wear there and not so much on the whole coin. Maybe the die was wore in that area.Thanks Ed​
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
coin is quit worn, - compare rim-surface high with second coin.
But very very nice shot, - its a common trick of coinsellers.
I think you`ll sadly surprized buying this one and looking from different side with another lightening
Yours
d
I am actually going to disagree on this one. I have just ran it through every filter I have and no real outlining to show the dots are there. If you stare at any surface and keep telling yourself you are looking for a small dot, then you will see a small dot even if you are looking at a blank piece of paper.

Two examples I have done is negative contrasting and emboss edge detection.

The negative shows no visible signs of a dot


The edge detection shows no pixel distorting where the dots would be



I of course may be wrong, I could solve it if the image was flash photographed with a sharp image, more than its present image state.

I have heard of the no dots and no first dot, but I don't think I have seen other variants that I can recall.
Restoration addict : Verdigris Removal : Zinc White spot removal : Iron Rust Removal : Silver brooch/necklace mount Removal
Citação: "Dato Mikeladze"​coin is quit worn, - compare rim-surface high with second coin.
​But very very nice shot, - its a common trick of coinsellers.
​I think you`ll sadly surprized buying this one and looking from different side with another lightening
​Yours
​d

​I am a coin dealer but know nothing of trick photo shooting . Ed

I collect German occupation coins WW1 for my own collection. Ed


Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
Here is a shot in brighter light. Ed

Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
No evidence of dots after enhancing the image in multiple forms, the rippled "flake" appearance is the coins surface (Good example of why you don't clean coins, it removes that thin surface that you cannot see)

There is no distorting of the coin surface on either side of the date.




Both of these are done in the form of 3D Bump mapping as well as light enhancing in multiple directions to show even the tiniest of imperfections on the surface. The one on the right is a negative (colouring reversed) just to make absolutely sure.
Restoration addict : Verdigris Removal : Zinc White spot removal : Iron Rust Removal : Silver brooch/necklace mount Removal
Well, we can ask any respected collector from Belgium. They know usually everything about their coinage, as they are patriots of Belgian numismatics.
From my side, I see dots in the first picture ( first post) , but not now.
And, Im still think that they are exist.
But, who knows.. probably You are right
Best
D
I think, it is a variant " dot before date only" 99%, and probably even " dot from both sides of date" - 40%
This is the other variant I have.
You notice there is no dots on top of the last E in Belgie either. Ed

The picture was taken under bright lights. Ed


Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford


Hmmm, very difficult to say. It looks like it's possible there is a dot at the left side of the date under the red line. The bow you see there might be from a dot an then it is on the correct spot (correct distance, correct height). At the right side there is nothing I think. Like Fluke said, if you keep staring there you also might see something like a bow that might be a part of a dot, but then it's not at the correct spot, so my guess is that there is no dot on the right side of the date.

Anyhow, according to the official Belgian catalog, there is no variety without a dot on both sides. There is a variety with a dot only at the left side, and a variety with a dot only at the right side:

After double checking, you are right about there being no variant for no dots. That makes it even more perplexing.
The best way I would try is to get it under a high magnification scope. Image enhancements are only as good as the image provided.

This is one that was labelled as dot after date only but you can make out on this one where the dot is on the left. The arrows indicate the edges of the dot, top left shows the clearest curve.





This is what it would look like under a digi scope. As you can see, it shows the missing dot compared to the image above that was taken with a digital camera and then enhanced.




Hopefully you can get a solid answer on these, very interesting indeed.
Restoration addict : Verdigris Removal : Zinc White spot removal : Iron Rust Removal : Silver brooch/necklace mount Removal
Citação: "Fluke"​After double checking, you are right about there being no variant for no dots. That makes it even more perplexing.
​The best way I would try is to get it under a high magnification scope. Image enhancements are only as good as the image provided.

​This is one that was labelled as dot after date only but you can make out on this one where the dot is on the left. The arrows indicate the edges of the dot, top left shows the clearest curve.





​This is what it would look like under a digi scope. As you can see, it shows the missing dot compared to the image above that was taken with a digital camera and then enhanced.




​Hopefully you can get a solid answer on these, very interesting indeed.
I would be willing to sent this coin to anyone with a High Magnification Scope to verify this for sure. Ed​
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
This variant has indeed been reported on cbnu.be, the Belgian forum for variants : http://www.cbnu.be/index.php?topic=2945.msg3099#msg3099
If you report it there, maybe it can be put in the next version of the catalog.

kind regards
Tony
World coins by date and mint place, 1850-2000
Citação: "tony.c"​This variant has indeed been reported on cbnu.be, the Belgian forum for variants : http://www.cbnu.be/index.php?topic=2945.msg3099#msg3099
​If you report it there, maybe it can be put in the next version of the catalog.

​kind regards
​Tony
That is more Dutch than I can handle. Ed​
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
Citação: "tony.c"This variant has indeed been reported on cbnu.be, the Belgian forum for variants : http://www.cbnu.be/index.php?topic=2945.msg3099#msg3099
If you report it there, maybe it can be put in the next version of the catalog.
Hi Tony, the variant 1916 without a dot before the date is already in the Belgian catalog (see picture a few posts higher, reference number for that coin 438c).
The questions are, is there a dot before the date or not and is there a dot after the date or not on the picture in the first post. In my humble opinion there is no dot after the date and there might be a dot before the date. That makes sense because that variant exists (that 438c). If it turns out there is no dot before the date either, then there is an until now unknown variant.
So let us hope a High Magnification Scope shines more light on this issue.
Citação: "Essor Prof"
Citação: "tony.c"This variant has indeed been reported on cbnu.be, the Belgian forum for variants : http://www.cbnu.be/index.php?topic=2945.msg3099#msg3099
​If you report it there, maybe it can be put in the next version of the catalog.
​Hi Tony, the variant 1916 without a dot before the date is already in the Belgian catalog (see picture a few posts higher, reference number for that coin 438c).
​The questions are, is there a dot before the date or not and is there a dot after the date or not on the picture in the first post. In my humble opinion there is no dot after the date and there might be a dot before the date. That makes sense because that variant exists (that 438c). If it turns out there is no dot before the date either, then there is an until now unknown variant.
​So let us hope a High Magnification Scope shines more light on this issue.
​In Morin 2008 var.438c is listed, in the new 2016 catalog by Laurens Aernout it is not listed.
I think the coin in this thread has a very weak dot after the date, so it is 438c.
World coins by date and mint place, 1850-2000
Citação: "tony.c"I think the coin in this thread has a very weak dot after the date, so it is 438c.
You mean a very weak dot before the date I suppose?
Citação: "Essor Prof"
Citação: "tony.c"I think the coin in this thread has a very weak dot after the date, so it is 438c.
​You mean a very weak dot before the date I suppose?
​Weak dot after the date, see description for 438c. No dot before the date.. B)
World coins by date and mint place, 1850-2000
Sorry, I was wrong. 438c is indeed no dot before the date. But when I look at the picture, I would say a weak dot before the date in stead of after, so 438a.
Citação: "Essor Prof"​Sorry, I was wrong. 438c is indeed no dot before the date. But when I look at the picture, I would say a weak dot before the date in stead of after, so 438a.

​Too difficult to tell without having the coin in hand...
World coins by date and mint place, 1850-2000
Solved after Ed sent these to me.

1916 with no dots, is in fact a normal but oddly worn variety. Both dots are present after enhancing.

Restoration addict : Verdigris Removal : Zinc White spot removal : Iron Rust Removal : Silver brooch/necklace mount Removal
Citação: "Fluke"​Solved after Ed sent these to me.

​1916 with no dots, is in fact a normal but oddly worn variety. Both dots are present after enhancing.

Thank You Fluke - happy but sad " but " the mystery is solved. Ed​
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
At least you have a new variety with the 1917 to help soothe the disappointment that this one turned out normal. :O
Restoration addict : Verdigris Removal : Zinc White spot removal : Iron Rust Removal : Silver brooch/necklace mount Removal
I found a 1916 with 2 dots to the left and 1as normal to the right like a mirror image of the 2 left dot variation has anyone seen one of these I'll get some close up images so u can see but they are visible under direct light.
Interesting will be watching. Ed

Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
​​The 2dots before date
I can also say that it's not a mark in the zinc the pic above is under 5.5 magnification and I was able to confirm that it's a definite raised dot.
Citação: "Coinage77"​I can also say that it's not a mark in the zinc the pic above is under 5.5 magnification and I was able to confirm that it's a definite raised dot.
​Still not positive - photo is blurry.
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
Status alterado para Aberto (edduns, 21 Out 2021, 21:26)
heres a 10x pic.it looks like it could be a die failure of some type.
Citação: "Coinage77"heres a 10x pic.it looks like it could be a die failure of some type.
​looks to me it could be a dot
Those who believe they can do something and those who believe they can't are both right.
- Henry Ford
So it could be another variation.my first reaction was it looks like an opposite to the 2dot after date variation.
not convinced
When looking at the shading it looks like it is a hole. The raised elements clearly have a shadow on the left side (lighting is on the right), but this "extra dot" seems to have the shade on the right and not on the left (so incuse).

just my 2 eurocents ;)
Just call me Bram

No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
I can say there's. Definite raised area and no hole the dark area is either a ghost of a dot or its actually just the color of the zinc in that area.little coin has me stumped.
Citação: "BramVB"​not convinced

​Also not convinced, not convinced at all:



When you click on the picture to further enlarge it, the right dot still is a dot, but there's nothing more left on the left spot.
There is definitely a bump there I felt it when I ran a cocktail stick over it . I just find it curious and odd I mean it could be die error.its wierd how it seems to mirror the other 2dot after date variant. For me at the least just a fun curiosity. While I'm here is there a thread for the 1862 Belgium 10cents overdate variation as I have 1and there's something going on under the 2
Just call me Bram

No new swaps for the moment, still too many half-ongoing swaps to clean up!
Citação: "BramVB"
​Exactly. Notice how the shadows are on opposite sides. That's because the one is above the surface and the other is into the surface. Not a bump but possible a corrosion pit.

» Política do fórum

O fuso horário usado é UTC+2:00.
O horário atual é 00:25.