Discussion: Otacilia Severa

[Robert M6]

I hope it is okay that I post this... I am new, and I am trying to learn.

I happened across a nice Otacilia Severa on an online auction site. Searching the seller's other items, I noted he has another listed. These are two separate items (different item numbers), and these are definitely two different lots.

I am not saying these coins are fake. I am not qualified to do so; I am trying only to understand what I am seeing.

I did search the Fake Coin Reports section for a coin showing similar defects before posting here. Also, the seller is not on the fake sellers list.

On the obverse side note at the 12:00 position the ripple at the coin edge and through the dots - on both coins.

On the reverse of both coins near the 6:00 position note the crack/defect.

The coins' flans do appear to be different (not shape).

So, what am I seeing here? Are these two coins from the same die? If so, what are the odds that a seller would have two such coins?

The seller is a coin dealer. I would think he would notice these similar defects between coins and mention them?

[Din X]

Same coin on both pictures !

[Robert M6]

I do not think this is so.

Look at the reverse of both. Coin on bottom seems to show some type of lines on the left side (looks almost like a crack)... the first coin does not show these.

Also, this coin (with the crack) is priced at half that of the other coin.

[Dominic T]

There is also that small pit next to the ´A ´ at 10 oclock on the first coin reverse ...
DT

[Din X]

You can easily verify if it is the same coin with the weight!
If both have the same weight, then the seller made an error and listed the same coin twice.

I do not see any difference in pictures !!!

Two identical coins would mean that one of them have to be a cast or an electrotype fake, but there is a problem even 2 cast fakes will not be completely identical, for examples holes from air bubbles will be at a different location or pearl/knots from casting will be at a different location and casting defects if available will be different, too.

[Robert M6]

The seller (a coin dealer) does not list the weight of the coins.

Note the crack I am speaking of in the blow ups of the coins. The coin at left does not have the crack running through it. It cannot be the same coin.

I understand the photos are poor, but I have only the seller's photos with which to work... still, the crack is evident in the second photo.

So the seller has priced the cracked coin at half price, noting the crack (presumably), but somehow misses the other identical defects on each coin? And the seller (coin dealer) has over 16,000 positive feedback reviews with no negative comments.

[nemesis]

I think the two pictures are of the same coin, but taken under different lighting conditions.  As such small features can appear in one picture and not the other.

[Robert M6]

I have contacted the seller for clarification. I will report back.

For the record, I am not interested in buying either coin, and so I am not looking for that kind of feedback - ie: I am not "screening a purchase."

This listing is just one I noticed while looking at coins in an attempt to put what I have learned here to the test: the style of coins, condition, patina, tooling, smoothing, etc.

[djmacdo]

That is perfectly legitimate, and in doing so you can teach the rest of us something also--but I would bet these are two photos of the same coin.  Such difference between photos makes realdifficulty when attempting to do die studies!

[spinkpa]

I see considerable difference on the obverse between the left crescent and the 'O' of Otacilia; also an extra artefact above the 'P' of 'Pietas' on the first coin that doesn't appear to be a photographic artefact. The lighting angle doesn't differ so much. I think 2 different pieces.

[Din X]

It is at 100 % the same coin.

On both picture there is a black spot right to the mouth and chin, the chance to find two coins with this black spot at same position from same dies and same die state with same flan shape, centering, waer etc. is zero.
Especially if both coins do have the same flan shape and same characteristics from striking (edge breaks, centering and from same very late and worn out dies) and same indvidual characteristics from wear (no wear visible) and from environment (black spot and on the reverse seems to be some orange/brown toning possibly from sulfor).

You can see that one of the coin is darker in pictures, which proves different lumination level.
And different lumination level means different contrast, because a darker lumination means more contrast.


You would not believe how difficult one and the same coin can look in different pictures especially small and low resolution low quality pictures !!!!!
I have made already bad experiences with this several time that coins from ebay or auctions looked different in hand or in my pictures with bright lumination you can make problems vanish and if you play with contrast and brightness you can pronounce details and let them look stronger than they really are.


Two so identical coins could not exist if so at least one of them must be fake if not both.
But cast fakes will always look a little bit different than the mother due to detail loss and transfer errors,
And even cast fakes from the same mould will look always a little bit different as mentioned abouve hole from air bibbles at different location, pearls/knots a different location and not identical casting defects.

And of course two or more identical looking coins will rise suspiciouns so forgerys will try to make them look different.
For example applying scratches to distract, by appling different articicial tonings, adding bankers marks or test cuts, adding encrustrations, harshly cleaning to damage surface, modify the mould to add or removed details and to modify the flan shape ...



 

[Robert M6]

I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. The seller has replied back to me that they are two different coins.

I do appreciate your thoughtful and detailed response.

[Din X]

"I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. The seller has replied back to me that they are two different coins."

If they would be actually 2 coins at least one or both must be CAST FAKES !!!!!!!!!!!!

I do not know how you could contact seller I always get

"We're sorry we couldn't find an answer for you. Unfortunately this seller is not able to respond to your question. We suggest reviewing the item again to see if your answer is in the seller's listing. "

Why have you uploaded such bad pictures, please upload better pictures of the other coin ?
It seems like you have intentionally uploaded such bad pictures to make comparison harder, if you know the ebay listing you could have uploaded the pictures form there in the MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH BETTER QUALITY !!!
I can not find the other listing, he offers at the moment only this Otacilia Severa.
I think he has sold this coin before but it was send back by seller and now he is reselling it with new pictures.
Please upload pictures of the coin when it was sold the first time !!!!

Both coins have the same dirt on the reverse, too.

I stay with my opinion, that it is the same coin [REMOVED BY ADMIN]!

[Joe Sermarini]

I am 99.999% certain they are the same coin, regardless of what the seller says.

[Robert M6]

I asked: Are you certain these are two different coins.

He replied not once, but THREE times: Yes; thanks.

I will not address the ludicrous and insulting accusations leveled at me...

I am (was) here to learn. Only. Following the advice posted in the myriad of threads directed at new collectors. Period.

[Din X]

The coin was first offered some time ago

"otacilia severa antoninianus fine roman coin AS SHOWN *3053 Price : $69.99 Ends on : 5 days Order Now"

it was not sold!

Now he reoffers it again with a starting price of 1 Dollar with new better pictures

"herennia otacilia severa antoninianus fine roman coin AS SHOWN *3053"


The number *3053 in inventory number, so everything he offers has an own unique number!


So you can guess if it really makes sense if he gives two different coins the same inventory number, or that he is offering the coin again because it was unsold last time this time with better pictures.


[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

[areich]

This is silly. There are no accusations. These are two pictures of the same coin, if the seller says something different, they are mistaken or lying. These are too similar even to be cast twins, all differences are easily explained by difference in lighting. Different lighting can produce even pictures that are drastically different, these are only very slightly different.

[Din X]

I have contacted seller!
We´ll see what he will respond.

[bpmurphy]

They look like different coins to me. In the first set of pics, the first coin is probably a cast of the second. There is a small pellet above the P in PIETAS and a casting bubble or perhaps a raised pellet to the right of the A.

On the obverse, the second E in SEVER is spread out in the first photo, but sharp in the second. And to the left on her eye, there is a small die rust spot in the second photo that’s not there in the first.

Barry Murphy

[Din X]

Seller has not responded so far
I will post his reply here as soon as he responds.

Both coins do have 100 % the same brown dirt on the reverse, I have enhanced contrast so it is clearly visible.
For me the only logical eplanation for same dirt is taht it must be the same coin.
The dirt has the same brown colour so it must be in both cases dirt.
The dirt of an authentic mother can of course be transferred to the impression of the coin (casting mould) and so to cast fakes but now comes the point, then there would be metal where the dirt is on the mother.
The I used the much better ebay pictures from the current listing but I had to use his bad picture from the first listing.
I have used free paint.net and used automatic picture improvement.
She has on the obverse dirt above her eye, this dirt could have been not sticking that solid and fallen of.
There is dirt on the coin and dirt can fall off and so it can create differences if you have one picture with more dirt and one with possibly less dirt.
That there is an identical black toning dot right to the mouth and chin of Otacilia on the obeverse is a problem to.

To apply on two cast fakes the same dirt does not make sense because it will not bring them anything and it is very difficult and time consuming.
Considering one of them is the host, that had natural dirt and that an identical  cast fake was produced, why applying on the cast fake the same dirt as on the host, it will not bring them anything and it is very difficult and time consuming.

[Robert M6]

I want to clarify a few points.

My original post was November 6 at approximately 10:30 AM.

At that time there were two auctions running. Once coin was $49.99. The second (or same, if you prefer) coin was $16.99.

The $49.99 coin listing ended the same day around 2:00 (three hours after I posted).

[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

[Din X]

I have reposted your picture of the conversation with the seller.

The seller HAS NOT SAID THAT THIS ARE TWO DIFFERENT COINS !!!!

The seller said "thanks mike" and "yes, thanks" and I think he thanked you for notifying him that the has listed the same coin twice or that he was using the wrong picture for another completely different Otacilia Severa coin he was listing at the same time! So he could have used 2 times pcitures of the same coin although he should have posted pictures of the 2 different Otacilia Severa coins.

[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

Two identical looking coins from the same dies with identical but very individual and complex dirt can not exist, mathematical probability is 0.

[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

[Robert M6]

[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

I take his response of "yes, thanks" to mean: yes, two different coins. This is supported by the fact that he let BOTH auctions run (one has now ended).

[REMOVED BY ADMIN]

[Joe Sermarini]

The number one rule on this board is "BE NICE!"

If you are not a moderator or Forum staff, do not accuse anyone of lying or being a troll. Report the post to the moderator and they will determine how to respond.

Do not argue on this board.

Over the years it has happened again and again, two people start arguing and then quit the boards. It is both ridiculous and sad. I have deleted all the unnecessary bits of this conversation and left only what is civil and makes sense.

[spinkpa]

The seller's answer does seem ambiguous.

As Din X points out, the 'dirt' is virtually identical. So I took a closer look at some other distinct features. Zooming right in on those features Barry points out above (see montage below):

1: The pellet on Otacilia's eye in one pic coincides with a somewhat purplish circular spot on the other. It looks like the clone tool has been in use;

2: Ditto for the extra reverse pellet above 'P', though this is a bit harder to see;

3: The second 'E' of 'Severa' appears sharp in one image, widened on the other. But the lighting on the empresses forehead (and the shadow cast by the coin) indicate that the coin has been rotated about 30 degrees, perhaps enough for a bright field area here to catch and reflect the light source straight back into the lens?

I had thought them 2 distinct pieces but now agree (well maybe only 99%  ) they are the same coin.

[labienus]

[Jochen]

[Din X]

[Joe Sermarini]

[djmacdo]

[glebe]

[djmacdo]

[Callimachus]

[Joe Sermarini]

[Harry G]

[spinkpa]