Options
We need relief!
shirohniichan
Posts: 4,992 ✭✭✭
I realize that low relief coins allow the Mint to strike more coins per die and thus make more money, but how difficult would it be to convince them to strike coins with higher relief (not high relief)?
Most state quarter designs look horrible as struck. Are we ever going to get circulating coins that don't look flat?
Most state quarter designs look horrible as struck. Are we ever going to get circulating coins that don't look flat?
Obscurum per obscurius
0
Comments
<< <i>Are we ever going to get circulating coins that don't look flat? >>
I highly doubt it.
edited: From the mint standpoint its all about money. They will always to what they can to save a buck or two.
Now from a combined standpoint: How nice would it be to see the Mint provide a low releif circulation coin and a high releif version for collectors? Maybe charge and extra buck for the trouble. I would pay it.
Since the "collector" coins aren't focused on die life, it shouldn't be a big deal cost-wise except for creating the master dies.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>Great idea - high relief for proof and mint set coins, low relief for circulation coins. That would also solve the problem of people getting business strikes back slabbed as satin finish by mistake.
Since the "collector" coins aren't focused on die life, it shouldn't be a big deal cost-wise except for creating the master dies. >>
resources to make pennies. Now with copper prices high and the old copper cents
starting to disappear from circulation, cent production is climbing again.
We lose a lot more than just money making pennies.
<< <i>Great idea - high relief for proof and mint set coins, low relief for circulation coins. That would also solve the problem of people getting business strikes back slabbed as satin finish by mistake.
Since the "collector" coins aren't focused on die life, it shouldn't be a big deal cost-wise except for creating the master dies. >>
I was really impressed with the relief of a business strike 1875 Peruvian 1/5 sol I bought. It certainly helps to raise the relief and maintain decent die life if the mints use silver or gold instead of cupro-nickel. Perhaps silver and gold proof coins could be struck with higher relief dies. The Mint can still make a decent profit and produce coins with more artistic merit.
Obscurum per obscurius
With the U.S. Mint, it's all about quantity, not quality.
Every Now and then I need a higher relief fix. So I go to the cent jar and find a 68-S. Works every time
<< <i>Shirohniichan,
With the U.S. Mint, it's all about quantity, not quality. >>
Perhaps we need to build a business model and get an audience with the Mint big wigs. Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. I don't imagine it would be simple, but most worthwhile ventures aren't.
Obscurum per obscurius
Here's the 1/5th sol I mentioned earlier. The scan stinks, but it gives you an idea of how high the relief was on a circulation coin back in yesteryear. It would be interesting to find out how long the dies lasted on these.
Ditto: P.S. congradulations on the new addition to the family!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks!
Obscurum per obscurius
I do think they'd sell more collector items if they had more attractive, higher relief.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>
This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally.
<< <i>
<< <i>Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>
This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally. >>
So you are not into proofs? It is not realistic to have mirrored fields and multi struck devices.
<< <i>
<< <i>Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>
This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally. >>
What do you mean by "the real thing"? Circulation designs?
The Royal Canadian Mint has burned me out of collecting all their dollar coins by issuing too many different designs. There are two different circulation varieties and at least four different commemorative or collector coins. When you add in BU and proof strikes, it gets far too expensive to keep up.
Canadian dollars this year:
2006 Proof Victoria Cross commem
$28.95
2006 BU Victoria Cross commem
$22.45
2006 Proof Victoria Cross commem (gold plated)
part of $70.95 proof set
2006 Prooflike Loon dollar
part of $13.45 PL set
2006 Specimen "Snowy Owl" dollar
part of $33.45 specimen set
2006 Prooflike "Lullaby" loon dollar
part of $24.95 2006 Baby Lullabies CD & Silver Coin Set
2006 Proof Lucky Loonie Colorized Silver
$34.95
$229.15 just for the dollar coins?! If the US Mint does this, it will burn out its customers, also.
Obscurum per obscurius
The U.S. Mint will have way too many.
<< <i>So you are not into proofs? It is not realistic to have mirrored fields and multi struck devices. >>
I am absolutely NOT into proofs. I have no problem if they float your boat as is the case with many collectors. But anything, proofs included, made for the express purpose of collecting turns me off.
<< <i><<<< Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>>>
<<This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally. >>
What do you mean by "the real thing"? Circulation designs? >>
What I mean by "the real thing" is that I want to collect coins that were ment to be used by the masses. For me, the ideal scenario would be for the mint to manufacture high relief coinage as a general practice and not for special purposes i.e. collectors edition.
<< <i>
<< <i><<<< Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>>>
<<This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally. >>
What do you mean by "the real thing"? Circulation designs? >>
What I mean by "the real thing" is that I want to collect coins that were ment to be used by the masses. For me, the ideal scenario would be for the mint to manufacture high relief coinage as a general practice and not for special purposes i.e. collectors edition. >>
While I would prefer circulation coins to come in higher relief, I doubt the Mint would oblige. I think it would be easier for them to see the business case for striking collector coins in higher relief. I guess the Peruvian Mint in the 19th century didn't worry about profits as much.
Obscurum per obscurius
<< <i>
<< <i><<<< Instead of going mostly to limited numbers of low-relief designs to hold issue price and resale value, they could make money by striking higher quality collector coins. >>>>
<<This idea might be popular with most collectors, but I want the real thing when it comes to coins. Buying special "collectors edition" coins (or any other thing for that matter) is a turn off for me personally. >>
What do you mean by "the real thing"? Circulation designs? >>
What I mean by "the real thing" is that I want to collect coins that were ment to be used by the masses. For me, the ideal scenario would be for the mint to manufacture high relief coinage as a general practice and not for special purposes i.e. collectors edition. >>
It might actually even save the mint money now that I think about it. In general the mint likes coinage because it last longer than paper money. It costs more to keep replacing the paper. If they would do a high releif on the coinage then it would be recognizable for a longer period of time meaning less would have to come out of circulation.
<< <i>I guess the Peruvian Mint in the 19th century didn't worry about profits as much. >>
They also didn't have to mint 1 zillion coins each day.
<< <i>It might actually even save the mint money now that I think about it. In general the mint likes coinage because it last longer than paper money. It costs more to keep replacing the paper. >>
There might actually be a vested interest against making money that lasts longer. Keep in mind the mint has it's own agenda. It doesn't want equipment breaking down from the difficulty of striking high relief coinage and it also doesn't want to have to reduce its staff due to coins lasting longer and not needing to be replaced. Besides, when was the last time you recieved a coin in change that didn't grade better than XF? The mint isn't waiting for coins to wear out to replace them.
Also, the mint doesn't print paper money. That's a different department altogether.
BTW, I picked it up so I could put it in the next penny stretching machine we come across on vacation.
Obscurum per obscurius
how about the mint producing
metal discs with light etching of
designs on the surfaces.
Camelot
high relief coins again. They have the resources to make eight or
ten billion high relief coins per year probably but use them to make
useless low denomination coinage in large numbers instead.
<< <i>Why stop at low relief coinage
how about the mint producing
metal discs with light etching of
designs on the surfaces. >>
Why stop there, how about flat polished surfaces with 3-D holographs.
The main reason I do not collect coins minted within the last 25 years is not because of availability, design, or metallic content, but because of the low relief and Mint "face lifts." Compare a 1974 quarter to a 1998 quarter and you’ll see what I mean.
<< <i>Look at the flat relief Washington quarters of today. The clad quarters from the 1960’s through 1980’s were perfectly acceptable to me.
The main reason I do not collect coins minted within the last 25 years is not because of availability, design, or metallic content, but because of the low relief and Mint "face lifts." Compare a 1974 quarter to a 1998 quarter and you’ll see what I mean. >>
The '96-'98 quarters still look atrocious to me. I'd thought they'd grow
on me but they come off very poorly with low relief, spaghetti hair, and
with a convex obverse.
The thought of going back to thaem is appalling.
and to boot..you want to pay more...?!??...........and don't forget those Unc mint rolls at a premium...not the big box mind you.I only order a few rolls not 50 rolls at a time....
How many folk realize this is going on now. Consider the cent reverse from 1994-2007 and probably 2008. The proofs are in higher relief. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the relief was lowered in 1993 and in 1994 they resumed using the old design for the proofs. If you want to test this assertion, roll up 50 pre 1993 cents and 50 post 1992 cents and compare the length of the rolls.
Proof Quarter reverses had emphasized relief from 1937 thru 1972 with the exception of a very few 1968 ones.