Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

PCI6


When would you like PCI6 to start  

33 members have voted

  1. 1. When would you like PCI6 to start

    • April
      11
    • May
      13
    • June
      4
    • July
      1
    • Other (please specify)
      4


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I went for April, but could even go for sometime in March. I'm kinda chomping at the bit as this will be my first one. I misssed the entry deadlines for the last one :ninja: so I'm really looking forward to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be a limit, generally i go for two per category.

 

Categories should be pretty much the same as the were last time so there will be;

 

1951-present

1901-1950

1801-1900

1701-1800

1501-1700

Exonumia

 

It's just what to do about the BCE-500 CE and 501-1500 categories, Stujoe (i think) did suggest blending them due to lack of entries.

 

I have reservations about doing that on two grounds though, firstly the stylistic differences between ancients and medievals are huge. It's like Christian's favourite saying "apples and oranges", so it's not particularly fair.

 

However, from the prespective of the person running it blending the two categories together has two results, firstly a positive result in that it sorts out two often undersubscribed categories and secondly a negative impact of having to find another new category to make up the full 8 that would be required (which is the second reservation from the paragraph above).

 

So i'm still thinking on that one, i do however, have another category lined up incase i decide to merge the former two. The new category would either be commemoratives or proofs, frankly it could be both, as commems and proofs are less about circulating and more about showing the engraver's skill (or potential lack of it as the case may be), but maybe also artistic display techniques (use of perspective, holograms, abstract forms etc.), or just a pretty design.

 

Wow i've just about sold that category to myself there. But mixing ancient and medieval still feels a bit... uncomfortable from where i'm sitting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...The new category would either be commemoratives or proofs, frankly it could be both, as commems and proofs are less about circulating and more about showing the engraver's skill (or potential lack of it as the case may be), but maybe also artistic display techniques (use of perspective, holograms, abstract forms etc.), or just a pretty design...

 

 

I definitely agree on that. Just a suggestion, you might want to start with 2 commem/proof categories corresponding with the dates: 1901-1950 and 1951+. Anything before that I think could go into the normal entry. Commems and proofs abound for the 20th century so I think it would be best to split them off. If there are not enough commem entrants (which I would doubt) then you could always merge categories as needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but that would mean i need to sacrifice another category. I can only have 8 categories (well 8 or 16... but 16 categories is going to be a nightmare with something like 8-16 coins in each category. That'd be something like 256 coins!)

 

 

Although i would be happy to combine as follows;

 

Ancient/Medieval

1501-1800

1801-1900

1901-1949

1950-present

1501-1949 proof/commem

1950-present proof/commem

Exonumia

 

Which is still 8 categories. Obviously 1501-1949 proof/commem won't have a great deal of material prior to 1800, and thus will most be for 19th century and early 20th century proofs. Although depending upon how categories pan out proofs (of circulating issues) can be entered in the regular categories (as GPNYC's recent US proof). I'm fairly flexible with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blending ancients and medieval will generally result in the latter being overwhelmed, but there are some nice coins in thsoe 1000 years :ninja:

 

If you are going to do Proof/Commem then I'd just put those into their own category. I think the time frames don't matter so much.

 

Ancient/Medieval

1501-1700

1701-1800

1801-1900

1901-1949

1950-present

proof/commem/bulllion

Exonumia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on the ancient/medieval thing there, my hesitance to put the two together was that medieval coins really wouldn't stand much chance since most folks would vote ancient over medieval most times. (Except me who could go either way on it).

 

Opinion on the commems seems to be differing. Sisu requested a date break up of the proofs/commems due to the sheer number of proofs/commems issued after 1950. That argument i think is valied.

 

Likewise i can also see that others might prefer the proofs/commems all as one.

 

I have no strong feelings on this either way.

 

The difference of opinion i think comes due to focus, those that collect 20th century and after material focus on that time frame and see the sheer volume that could be entered. Whilst us members that hang out in the ancient/medieval periods and rarely bat much of an eyelid at the modern stuff are more concerned with ensuring the earlier periods get representation of some sort and that there isn't a heavy modern bias.

 

Although i was seriously toying with the idea of having a 'colourful toned' coin category.

 

So many ideas but time constrictions mean i have to restrict the number of categories, otherwise this thing'll be running until Christmas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter much to me either way but I think you are right that medieval will be at a disadvantage if thrown in with ancients.

 

No matter what way you slice and dice the categories, there are going to be coins that don't fit quite right. There probably isn't a perfect solution but I don't mind trying new stuff. Personally, I would like to see an crocodile/alligator category. :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter much to me either way but I think you are right that medieval will be at a disadvantage if thrown in with ancients.

 

No matter what way you slice and dice the categories, there are going to be coins that don't fit quite right. There probably isn't a perfect solution but I don't mind trying new stuff. Personally, I would like to see an crocodile/alligator category. :ninja:

 

 

Wouldn't we all!

 

Actually Stujoe you may remember i did raise the question of a themed approach to PCI a while back.

 

You know something like Animal themed, so a 1960s Croc coin (per say) could go in that category, whilst opposite so could a horsey coin (Ancient Larissa anyone?) or an Athenian Owl... the list goes on.

 

Other categories could be; Religious themed (there's alot of coins with crosses or the Virgin and Child), Heraldry (sp?) themed (US eagle coinage falls here or under the animal category), the Liberty theme (France, US etc.), the Personification theme, the dead politician/monarch/despotic dictator theme, the Artistic representation theme (abstract designs like the Salvidor Dali coins... the shadows coin, but celtic coins could also fall under this category with their artistic representations of horses). And by popular request the Nudes theme... so both women and St. George can get in on this one.

 

Just a thought anyhow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can put the category thing regarding commems and proofs to a vote if people would prefer that?

Nah, you just decide. It can be sliced so many ways it is going to have to be a somewhat arbitrary decision no matter what. You could break out gold, silver, copper and other metals too :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be, but continents doesn't really narrow things down that much... pretty wide catchment criteria thera. Africa's a big place, Europe's got a long history of coin manufacturing as have parts of Asia.

 

Antarctic wouldn't yield much... if anything?

 

Most people vote on design, designs do differ from place to place, but more noticable they differ due to the time they were struck, or due to the metal they're struck in.

 

I dunno if by continent approach would work, i'd give it a try but i think there'd be a heck of alot of apples/oranges and alot of people screaming "unfair!" as a gold ducat comes against a euro. Or an Indian Rupee against a Chinese cash coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opinion on the commems seems to be differing. Sisu requested a date break up of the proofs/commems due to the sheer number of proofs/commems issued after 1950. That argument i think is valied.

 

Likewise i can also see that others might prefer the proofs/commems all as one.

 

I have no strong feelings on this either way.

 

The difference of opinion i think comes due to focus, those that collect 20th century and after material focus on that time frame and see the sheer volume that could be entered. ...

 

 

Basically I had 2 thoughts behind this:

 

1) Commems/proofs would perhaps be better served if they were in there own category as some will vote against it no matter what its artistic/thematic/historic merits. Also it will keep circulating strikes up against other circulating strikes.

 

2) Dividing the dates: 1950 is perhaps not the best dividing date, but in general before that commems were not as common, had reasonable themes to commemorate, and were not mere money makers.

 

 

This was not so much a request as a suggestion if you are looking for new ways to tweak the categories. Make them as you will. I am game for any! :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Request/suggestion it's all the same in my book, i'll tweak it in a few directions before i chose any. I left plenty of time for tweaking and fine tuning.

 

You 'suggestion' was a sensible one and had it's merits Sisu that's why i've put it upon the list of possibilities.

 

No doubt more will arise before i decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) Dividing the dates: 1950 is perhaps not the best dividing date, but in general before that commems were not as common, had reasonable themes to commemorate, and were not mere money makers.

 

Over here in the US the early ones were very definitely money makers on questionable themes. If you push it back to 1900 then we'd be OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) Dividing the dates: 1950 is perhaps not the best dividing date, but in general before that commems were not as common, had reasonable themes to commemorate, and were not mere money makers.

 

 

I had the US in mind, thus I decided to add that qualifier. :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm going to leave them exactly as they were before. I've given it some thought but the old saying comes to mind, "if it ain't broke...".

 

I'll post the entry threads up in the next few weeks, although they'll be locked out of use until the 9th.

 

But it gives plenty of time for everyone to get organised and ready for this one. If you haven't got any coins to enter go out and buy some! :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...