Author Topic: Circulation sets with poorly unified design  (Read 19863 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« on: December 01, 2012, 11:17:49 PM »
Apart from the design of an individual coin, there should be consistency between the coins of a set, if we are to achieve a set with well unified design. This means paying attention not only to the pictorial design, but to the other elements too: denominational values, fonts, lettering, etc. Their style and position must generally be consistent from coin to coin within the set. Over time, I will show some examples of what I mean.

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2012, 11:38:00 PM »
Exhibit number 1: Austria's pre-euro set. This is the most poorly unified set I have seen.

On the left hand side, you see the obverse of the coins. As a general rule, the obverse is the side that carries the country name, but see also: Obverse and reverse. On the right hand side you see the reverse of the coins.

The 1, 5 and 10 Schilling coins each carry a large pictorial thematic design, yet in the case of the 5 Schilling alone, the horseman has been placed on the obverse, along with the country name. Far better to have placed it on the reverse, for the sake of consistency.

Look at the denominations. These appear on the reverse, but in the case of the 10 Groschen and 1 Schilling, they also appear on the obverse - another obvious stylistic mistake.

The shield appears on the 50 Groschen and the 5 Schilling. The eagle appears on the other coins, except for the 1 Schilling, which has neither shield nor eagle. Perhaps it would have been better to place the shield on all Groschen denominations and the eagle on all the Schilling denominations. Some limited varition in the eagles would have been acceptable. However, the situation as it stands is a mess.

Now look at the fonts. Not one coin has the same font on both sides, and they vary markedly also in their size and their spacing. Another huge conceptual mess.

As for the dates, they all appear on the reverse, except for on the Schilling, which is already the odd man out for having no shield or eagle, where it graces the obverse. Yet more inconsistency.

What more can I say? It looks as though 12 different artists, all with very different styles and ideas, had worked on these 12 designs. I am not a fan of the euro, but I was relieved when the Austrians adopted the euro and at last acquired a well unified set of designs.



See also: Austria: pre-euro coinage from 1946 to 2001.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2019, 08:05:50 PM by <k> »

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2012, 05:32:45 PM »
Here is an example of the last pre-euro design series of Germany. The 1, 2, 5 and 10 Pfennig coins show the country name on the obverse and the denomination on the reverse. This changes when we reach the 50 Pfennig coin, which shows both the country name and the denomination on the obverse, while the reverse carries a pictorial design. I suspect this was done because the 50 Pfennig is a small coin, and perhaps a smaller pictorial design would not have looked satisfactory. However, it spoils the uniformity of the set, since the 1 Mark coin falls back into line, with the country name and denomination once more on opposite sides.

Each individual coin is competently designed, but so it is unfortunate that the 50 Pfennig disturbs the unity of the set. Furthermore, it looks out of place to have only one pictorial design amongst all the symbolic oak leaves and heraldic eagles.

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2012, 05:33:28 PM »
My solution would have been to place the design of the kneeling woman on the 1 Mark piece, where there would then be room to display the country name around the design. The 50 Pfennig would then have carried the same oak leaves as the rest of the lower denominations, or better still, an additional and different pictorial design, since the lone pictorial design (the kneeling woman) looks out of place, sandwiched between the oak leaves and the eagles. The German euro set uses a similar solution, by having 3 coins with a symbolic design (the 1, 2 and 5 cents depict oak leaves), 3 coins with a pictorial design (the Brandenburg Gate on the 10, 20 and 50 cents), whilst the two highest denominations sport an eagle.

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2012, 05:34:13 PM »
As for the higher denominations, the reverse of the 2 DM piece depicted a different deceased politician each year. Instead of repeating the country name on the reverse, which also appears as usual on the obverse, it would have been better to have given the politician’s name. For some reason the denomination has now been placed on the obverse, instead of the reverse, so once again the consistency of the set has been spoilt.
 
There is some attraction in having three different eagles on the three highest denominations. However, the eagle on the 5 DM piece, alone among the three, is now on the opposite side from the country name. Technically the eagle is therefore on the reverse of the piece, whilst the other two eagles grace the obverse, where the country name is. Perhaps this does not matter so much, since the coin is the highest denomination of the series, so it can afford to stand out. However, the stylistic sequence has already been broken by the fact that the pictorial design, of the politician, is sandwiched between the non-pictorial designs of the 1 Mark and 5 Mark coins; in my opinion it would have looked better as the final piece, on the 5 DM. It is likely, though, that the habit of varying the 2 Mark design developed when it still occupied the highest circulation coin and before the introduction of the 5 DM coin.

The German set suffers from quite a few inconsistencies, so I would give it only 6 out of 10. However, it is nowhere near as deficient in this respect as the Austrian set shown earlier in this topic.

paisepagal

  • Guest
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2012, 05:38:45 PM »
Here's the latest rupee symbol set, as you can see, the Rs10 is totally out of place from the rest of the set... It is in fact, a hangover from the information technology design





« Last Edit: September 07, 2013, 05:10:17 AM by paisepagal »

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2012, 05:46:09 PM »
Still not as bad as the German set, as only the top denomination is out of sync, so 8 out of 10 for consistency. Zero out of ten for design aesthetics, however.  :-X

paisepagal

  • Guest
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2012, 05:52:48 PM »
Haha, yes... Can't hold your breath for Indian motifs at the moment. Come to think of it, our dear friends to the west seem pretty inconsistent too... The Re1 coin for instance blatantly replaces the crescent- star , while the Rs2 and Re1 seem to be in a minority with the rest of the set. The Rs10 coin however is a commemorative of Fatima Jinnah, so we'll have to ignore that one. The under-25p were banished long ago.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2019, 02:22:16 PM by <k> »

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2012, 05:56:06 PM »
Agreed, quite a messy set from Pakistan.

paisepagal

  • Guest
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2012, 06:04:25 PM »
I noticed the 2p coin has Bengali on it, so it's of the older variety... But you still get the idea  ;)
Trying to finger the Chinese next, but turns out they are pretty much sorted, so i must pick on the other china, or rather Taiwan  >:D ... Again the two top denoms want to be different ..


« Last Edit: January 27, 2018, 02:32:39 PM by <k> »

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2012, 06:43:56 PM »
Taiwan  >:D ... Again the two top denoms want to be different ..

But you have a series of portraits, and stylistically none of them jars with the rest, so IMO there is no great problem with the Taiwanese set.

paisepagal

  • Guest
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #11 on: December 03, 2012, 04:25:35 PM »
But you have a series of portraits, and stylistically none of them jars with the rest, so IMO there is no great problem with the Taiwanese set.

Fair enough on the portraits side... But somehow I feel the 20NTD doesn't fit with the rest... The 50 NTD is passable... So your call, a first rejection post for this thread ?  :)

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #12 on: December 03, 2012, 06:12:03 PM »
So your call, a first rejection post for this thread ?  :)

No, of course I don't want to reject your post. Unlike the "One of a kind?" thematics topic, this is just an opinion piece, and on this issue you have a different opinion from me. The 20 and 50 coins are markedly more modern than the rest in design, but then they are the newest additions to the set. Moreover, the 20 coin has a pictorial design, unlike the lower denominations, but this is often the case with higher denominations. At least it is not stuck sequentially in the middle of the sequence as an "odd-man-out". So there are pros and cons with these new designs. Eventually a new design series will replace all these coins, then the unity of the new set will presumably be 100%.

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #13 on: December 03, 2012, 06:20:51 PM »
The pre-decimal set that I grew up with in the 1960s had poorly unified design, because the individual pieces were the result of a compromise in the mid 1930s, in the time of Edward VIII and George VI. The farthing depicted a wren, whilst the halfpenny portrayed a ship, bu these pictorial designs were mixed with heraldic and symbolic designs on the higher denominations. As a child I did not, of course, ever notice or think about these discrepancies.









 

Wren.






Golden Hind.



You can see that the farthing originated from a completely different conceptual set. Sadly, the Royal Mint thought that the public would not accept such a radical departure from tradition in the 1930s.




 



 



 
 
 
« Last Edit: January 27, 2018, 02:38:47 PM by <k> »

Offline <k>

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21 083
Re: Circulation sets with poorly unified design
« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2012, 01:46:18 AM »
After the Soviet Union collapsed, Azerbaijan hurriedly produced a national coinage, which started to appear in 1992. The artist has committed the cardinal error of varying the side on which each element appears. The denomination changes sides from the obverse to the reverse; sometimes the date is on its own, at other times it appears alongside the denomination. On the 50 and 20 qapik the denomination appears inside a geometric shape; on the other two coins it does not. The artist should have sat down down and planned each detail carefully before commencing. Evidently he did not.

Fortunately these coins quickly became worthless, and a beautifully designed new series was introduced in 2006.



See also: Azerbaijan: post-Soviet coinage.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2019, 08:07:39 PM by <k> »