Tuvalu: unadopted designs

[<k>]

The finished product.

[<k>]

1c.    Lambis shell.
2c.    Stingray.
5c.    Tiger shark.
10c.  Crab.
20c.  Flying fish.
50c.  Octopus.
$1.   Turtle.

Designer: John Donald.

The finished result. Well worth all the trouble, I think. 

Do you agree? You're allowed to agree.

[Figleaf]

OK, I'll agree, but with two observations. 

On the one cent, the denomination should not have overlapped the shell or there should have been overlap on some of the other denominations also. The additional detail that didn't work on the sketches might have been functional on the coin; these are underwater scenes, but that's IMO not clear enough on the coins.

Peter

[<k>]

On the one cent, the denomination should not have overlapped the shell or there should have been overlap on some of the other denominations also.

Fair point.

The additional detail that didn't work on the sketches might have been functional on the coin; these are underwater scenes, but that's IMO not clear enough on the coins.

There are small bubbles to indicate this. The position of the creatures largely indicates that they are moving through the sea, unless you imagine that they are being portrayed from a bird's eye view. The knowledge that they are all sea creatures should trigger the recognition that they are being portrayed in water.

[andyg]

I don't often contribute much to these design threads - not because I don't think they are brilliant but because I often don't know enough to contribute more.....

I have a question on the rejected 2 cent if you don't mind,


This one is the view of a ray from beneath, whereas the final design was from above,


I wonder if this was just for cosmetic reasons?

[<k>]

I couldn't find any specific reason for this being rejected. However, a first general criticism of all the designs was that they were too bare and should include more detail. The second general criticism, after this was done, was that the artist had now included rather too much detail. You can see that the rejected one has rather more swirls and bubbles than the accepted one. Why the artist switched from portraying the underside to the view from above, I don't know. Furthermore, I had never noticed and wonder how you did. It does make me wonder what you get up to in your spare time.