Design gimmicks that extend across a whole circulation set

Started by <k>, January 08, 2019, 12:35:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

<k>

Gibraltar 2004-5 sets.jpg


How many different circulation sets have used design gimmicks?

Here is one gimmick, though it extends across two years.

Gibraltar issued a set of circulation designs for its coin series of 2004.

In 2005, it used the same designs but on different denominations!
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

<k>

UK jigsaw series--.jpg

An illustration of Matthew Dent's "jigsaw" set.


In 2008, the UK issued a new circulation series.

Its individual designs formed a sort of jigsaw picture.

I believe one or two other circulation sets have used such a gimmick.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

<k>

In 1994, Cape Verde issued circulation coins with three sets of design themes: birds, flowers, and ships.

Anomalously, there was only a single 1 escudo design, which showed a turtle.








Cape Verde 1994 set-Ships.jpg


See also:  Modern coinage of Cabo Verde (Cape Verde).
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

<k>

Can you think of any other such gimmicks used for circulation sets?
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

Can you specify what you mean by gimmick? If a hologram counts, Spain. If a denomination in symbols counts, Tonga, Netherlands.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

<k>

Quote from: Figleaf on January 08, 2019, 06:08:27 PMCan you specify what you mean by gimmick? If a hologram counts, Spain. If a denomination in symbols counts, Tonga, Netherlands.

Peter

I've given you three good examples. The concept is by its nature subjective - it's what you might regard as a gimmick. Gimmick is rather a negative word - perhaps innovation might be more useful. After all, things that were regarded as gimmicks in the past may become standard.

Tonga - see below. As for Spain, the Netherlands - which years, denominations?




Tonga.  One animal or plant per unit of denominations, e.g. 1 pig, 2 water melons, 5 bananas, 10 cows, 20 bees, 50 fish, 100 trees.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

Spain: KM 924 - 500 ptas 1993-2000.
Netherlands 1982-2000:
vertical lines, 2 piece bar - 5 cent
vertical lines, 1 piece bar - 10 cent
hor & ver lines, 4 piece bar - 25 cent
hor & ver lines, 1 piece bar - 1 gulden
hor, ver and diag lines, 4 piece bar - 2½ gulden
hor, ver and diag lines, 2 piece bar - 5 gulden

The number of pieces in the bar stand for 1, ½ and ¼; the lines for a power of 10, e.g. if there had been a 50 cent piece, it would have had hor & ver lines and a 2 piece bar (102 * ½)

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

<k>

The Netherlands - what a disgracefully obscure system - I can't get my head round it.






Could somebody please pick a relevant piece and explain it, step by step. The 2½ unit would be a good start.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

OK, the 2½ gulden (it's actually simpler than the £sd system)

  • Horizontal, vertical and diagonal lines: 3 different directions, therefore 103, which is 10 * 10 * 10 = 1000 cent.
  • The bar is divided in 4 pieces.
  • The denomination is therefore 1000 cent / 4 = 250 cent = 2½ gulden.
Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

<k>

Thank you. I see now. It's rather convoluted, though. Who ever invented it was a serious nerd.  ::)
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

You mean that having 100 trees on a coin is not nerdy? :)

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

<k>

Yes, but it's more playful, rather than Asperger's. The big failing of the Dutch designs is that the number of individual lines is without significance.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.

Figleaf

No. The designer needed four lines because the bar had to be divided in four pieces max and the divisions of the bar are aligned with the horizontal lines.

Ninaber van Eyben, the designer, had his photo studio in The Hague. I worked at the ministry of Economic Affairs at the time. The shop was on the way from the ministry to the prime minister's office, so I passed it often. At the time, coins were usually designed by sculptors, used to working in 3D. A coin design by a photographer, used to working in 2D was innovative. You will find that the portrait is also quite different from the usual, but in line with how an art photographer would create depth in 2D.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

Pabitra

No
The designs by Bruno are considered to be a milestone in design.They are still referred as important even after 30 years ( in 2013).
See

http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/1512/590

<k>

Quote from: Figleaf on January 08, 2019, 06:08:27 PMCan you specify what you mean by gimmick? If a hologram counts, Spain: KM 924 - 500 ptas 1993-2000.

Spain 500 pesetas 1993.jpg


Your example applies to a single denomination. I was specifically looking for gimmicks that extend across a whole set, or at least part of it.

Nonetheless, I shall illustrate your example. This coin has a latent image, a crowned "M", for the Madrid Mint. It has been added as a security feature, since the 500 pesetas coin was a high value denomination. As I mentioned up-thread, "things that were regarded as gimmicks in the past may become standard". Latent images are now reasonably common, but it may be that Spain provided the first circulating example - does anybody know?

See also: Latent images on coins.
Visit the website of The Royal Mint Museum.

See: The Royal Mint Museum.