New nickel designs...what a disappointment!
291fifth
Posts: 24,336 ✭✭✭✭✭
I received the September 6 edition of Coin World today. Starting on page 92 they picture 140 plus new reverse designs for the nickel. Design renaissance? Forget it. Remember that most of the people selected were graphic designers, not artists...it shows. Also, the compensation they receive from the mint is very low...that shows too.
A surprising number of the design submissions are just plain poor. I didn't consider any be be particularly original.
If you want great designs you hire the BEST ARTISTS, COMPENSATE THEM ACCORDINGLY and LET THEM DO GOOD WORK. The mint just doesn't seem to get it. Perhaps they never really wanted to.
A surprising number of the design submissions are just plain poor. I didn't consider any be be particularly original.
If you want great designs you hire the BEST ARTISTS, COMPENSATE THEM ACCORDINGLY and LET THEM DO GOOD WORK. The mint just doesn't seem to get it. Perhaps they never really wanted to.
All glory is fleeting.
0
Comments
Montecello
How about the Roman Numeral V ?
And put some stars around it, and some rays (no forget those)
And be sure to put the word CENTS on it too!
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
<< <i>So, what would you put on the nickels? >>
It makes little difference what I would put on the nickel since I am not a top artist (just an amateur with a great deal of knowledge about art and art history). We need to find a modern day James Earl Fraser and let him design a great coin.
However, I believe Teddy Roosevelt specificly targeted the nations finest artists when he desired a change in our country's coinage. And as we all know, this proved to be a wise decision. So 291fifth has a valid point.
<< <i>Dump the presidents and bring back Lady Liberty! >>
Ask me no questions, I'll tell you no lies.
I do agree that the designs being placed on the "changed" coinage really suck...but there's little that anyone truly artistic could do with a quarter millimeter of relief.
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
09/07/2006
<< <i>Remember that most of the people selected were graphic designers, not artists...it shows >>
True, of all the people thay added to this outside artist program only ONE has any experience with three dimentional medalic or sculptural design. All of the rest are trained in two dimentional design only
<< <i>
<< <i>Remember that most of the people selected were graphic designers, not artists...it shows >>
True, of all the people thay added to this outside artist program only ONE has any experience with three dimentional medalic or sculptural design. All of the rest are trained in two dimentional design only >>
Kinda makes sense in a sad way. Coins are now 2D with such low relief.
Are you able to point us to a web site that has pics or can you upload some of them ?
as I expected, there are several extremely good designs and very few which are not acceptable.
Most are better than the regular Jefferson nickel.
<< <i>I said it before, and I'll say it again. It's long past time to ditch the dead presidents and go back to using stylized Liberty heads/figures and eagles on our coinage like was originally intended. >>
Not to be argumentive, but have you ever seen this in print, such as maybe a law that was passed???
Ken
<<True, of all the people they added to this outside artist program only ONE has any experience with three dimensional medalic or sculptural design. All of the rest are trained in two dimensional design only >>
How do you know these things? Are you looking at the one word or sentence that the Mint used to describe each artist in their press releases? Did you ever consider that maybe such titles are just that - titles? And since when do titles describe every aspect a person's qualifications, especially in a realm as meandering as the arts? For example, I have never heard of a graphic designer that did not have an extensive fine arts background, consisting of both art history and hands-on media exploration. And as for only one artist in the program having any experience in 3-dimensional work, well, I know for a fact that this is just plain not true...
To digress for a minute, it is a romantic notion that suggests only ‘gallery’ artists are ‘true’ artists - as if graphic or commercial artists have somehow compromised their artistry for lack of talent or opportunity. To that I ask how many galleries have you entered only to be bombarded with paintings of sports heroes, or Ray Charles with lightening shooting from his finger tips, or golf balls bouncing into giant martini glasses, or day-glo Snoopies, or black and white photos of the Beatles, all being pushed by commissioned salesman who are eager to talk about investment potential? In contrast, I am sure we can all point to some advertisement that has genuinely captivated us at one time or another, perhaps even in a life affecting way. Just do it, live to ride, be all you can be! To be clear, I am not trying to promote or disrespect either school here, rather I am only challenge assumptions about what constitutes the truly creative versus purely commercial.
Frasier and St. Gaudens deserve our utmost admiration and respect, both for what they accomplished as artists and in turn for our nation’s coinage - but it is important to recognize that those men lived in another time. In their day, their work was both literal and figurative and at the forefront of visual expression - in the decades since, such attributes have often taken diverging paths. For the purposes of coin design, I do not believe that the past hundred years of contemporary art would allow for ‘contemporary equivalents’ of Frasier and St. Gaudens. But it has allowed for other, more modern possibilities… that have yet to be fully explored.
I think we can all agree that coin design is a subject that everyone who spends time reading these forums cares about very deeply, and I think it is only natural that people use these boards to let off a little steam when the Mint's efforts fall short of what one might expect or desire. Regardless, I might suggest that constructively discussing the designs themselves that appear in the Coinworld feature may lead to a more progressive and productive dialogue regarding the direction of modern US coinage than dissecting the qualifications of the artists in the A.I.P. ever will. Along those lines, which designs do you like and why? Which designs do you not like and why? I think we can all point to coins from the past two centuries that would constitute greatness, but what about from the last ten years? If you feel there are no U.S. coins that qualify, then what about those from other countries?
My $.02 -
>>>My Collection
CD
<< <i>Does anyone have links or pics of the designs or do I have to go up to Walmart and look at them in a CoinWorld on the rack?
CD >>
Way cool!!
Does it include Coin Prices magazine or is that separate? It's always
great to see evidence that coin collecting is becoming more popular.
<< <i>...
I think we can all agree that coin design is a subject that everyone who spends time reading these forums cares about very deeply, and I think it is only natural that people use these boards to let off a little steam when the Mint's efforts fall short of what one might expect or desire. Regardless, I might suggest that constructively discussing the designs themselves that appear in the Coinworld feature may lead to a more progressive and productive dialogue regarding the direction of modern US coinage than dissecting the qualifications of the artists in the A.I.P. ever will. Along those lines, which designs do you like and why? Which designs do you not like and why? I think we can all point to coins from the past two centuries that would constitute greatness, but what about from the last ten years? If you feel there are no U.S. coins that qualify, then what about those from other countries?
My $.02 - >>
Artist: Great rant. (we appreciate a good rant here) I think Weaver's "Eagle 2" is excellent.
Both of Taylor's works are very good but might not work on a small coin like the nickel. "eagle
head", "Magpie and Buffalo Skull", Eagle With Peacepipe", "Plains Indians, Peace and Security",
"Grizzly Bear", "Culmination Liberty", "Jumping Salmon", and "Standing Grizzly" all look like very
good art that might make great coins. Several of the others are quite nice and might strike up
well on a coin.
For your edification, may I present Article 10 of the Coinage Act of 1792
SEC. 10. And be it further enacted, That, upon the said coins respectively, there shall be the following devices and legends, namely: Upon one side of each of the said coins there shall be an impression emblematic of liberty, with an inscription of the word Liberty, and the year of the coinage; an upon the reverse of each of the gold and silver coins there shall be the figure or representation of an eagle, with this inscription, "United States of America" and upon the reverse of each of the copper coins, there shall be an inscription which shall express the denomination of the piece, namely, cent or half cent, as the case may require.
Perhaps the Mint ought to make alternative verisions of every series that could circulate alongside the plain-jane commercial strikes. They'd be designed by sculptors, have higher relief, lower mintages, designs with artistic merit/collector appeal.
Just a thought.
<< <i>Article 10 of the Coinage Act of 1792 >>
It's now 204 years later and we're in a completely different world.
<< <i>And be it further enacted, That, upon the said coins respectively >>
What were the "said" coins?
Ken
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i><< Article 10 of the Coinage Act of 1792 >>
It's now 204 years later and we're in a completely different world. >>
It may be a completely different world, but the requirement is still there. It is now US Code Title 31 sec. 324
Upon one side of all coins of the United States there shall be an impression emblematic of Liberty, with the inscription of the word "Liberty". . .
<< <i>It makes little difference what I would put on the nickel since I am not a top artist (just an amateur with a great deal of knowledge about art and art history). We need to find a modern day James Earl Fraser and let him design a great coin. >>
Hi,
in addition to the obvious, he did a really great sculpture of George Washington at the New York World's fair of 1939. The last issue I thought was attractive was the Roosevelt 10c - before that the Jefferson 5c. I do not like anything much after that unfortunately.
Best,
Billy
<< <i>Ksteelheader, For your edification, may I present Article 10 of the Coinage Act of 1792 SEC. 10. And be it further enacted, That, upon the said coins respectively, there shall be the following devices and legends, namely: Upon one side of each of the said coins there shall be an impression emblematic of liberty, with an inscription of the word Liberty, and the year of the coinage; an upon the reverse of each of the gold and silver coins there shall be the figure or representation of an eagle, with this inscription, "United States of America" and upon the reverse of each of the copper coins, there shall be an inscription which shall express the denomination of the piece, namely, cent or half cent, as the case may require. >>
They should have made this a constitutional ammendment.
Actually, the Mint makes far, far more money on pretty coins than spends on having them designed. The Mint is one of the few government agencies that actually puts money back into the treasury - from .5 to 2 Billion dollars anually. (And I don't mean in face value.) In addition to the literally Millions and Millions of products the Mint sells each year to collectors, it also makes a considerable profit each time someone snags a coin from circualtion that then needs to then be replaced. So really it is in everyone's best interest for the Mint to make the most desirable coins that it can come up with - theirs and ours.
*
Sumnom - for what it's worth, I too really like the Sacagawea. It's attractive, it tells a story, and it makes me feel good each time I encounter one. For a while I wasn't so crazy about the reverse - I thought it seemed kind of cool as contrasted against such a warm presence on the obverse - but then someone on this board likened it to the bold, archetentual reverse of the Standing Liberty Quarter, and I came to see it in a whole new light.
I also take note of your point that the Sacagawea is the only circulating coin to not feature a stark profile. As long as we are stuck with Presidents (a practice that was regarded as monarchical and broadly condemned by the founding fathers, with the exception of Adams I think,) why not turn them forward a bit so that they too might make eye contact like Sacagawea? That might be a pretty proof set - engaging glances from five faces. I suspect it might allow for more historical character to be infused, thus imparting to modern Americans something about our nation's history that they might not otherwise have gotten. What are people's thoughts on this?
>>>My Collection
<<True, of all the people they added to this outside artist program only ONE has any experience with three dimensional medalic or sculptural design. All of the rest are trained in two dimensional design only >>
Well, another way to look at it is, at least they considered having designs on coins. They could just as easily have gone with plachets that were slugs. Different sizes, weights, and colors for each denomination, maybe a simple pressing on each that said the denominations and U.S. Coin.
That would have really decreased the cost of minting coinage.