Are Coin Designs Getting Less Appealing With Time?

Another thing I most dislike about modern coins, which some well described as cheap and minimalistic, is the total lack of fine details on the designs; making it quite difficult to properly judge the right grade (not that it matters anyway, at least for now).

Take this example: one of the last designs from the Netherlands before the Euro...




How can you tell if it's F or VF, or even EF, if it has no fine details that you can look for?

I actually think the shield on the reverse of the cent is better than the Lincoln Memorial. Who needs the memorial AND the president? Why do we need Jefferson AND monticello? Let's mix it up a little. I like the Roosevelt dime and the Kennedy half dollar though. They are much better.

I agree. Most modern coinage is pretty weak. The trend that seemed to start in the last 40 years that was displayed on that Netherlands coin is a lack of symmetry. People feel much more comfortable doing it. They do it with the statue of liberty on the reverse of the dollar coins now. If anything, mints should know that coin collectors are borderline autistic and OCD, and a lack of symmetry makes us insane with rage (or fearful of imminent death).

I like hammered coins -though for now I only own a few- but for me the golden age of coin design was between the last half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century -around the 1900-. I think it was an age that had it all: the will to make beautiful designs for every single coin produced, and the means to do it properly; while earlier times had the will but not the means, and in later times they had the means, but not the will.

Ok see this is where you guys are wrong. YOU may not like the new coin designs, but some people do, or they wouldn't be selling collectible versions of them.

The same thing is with cars.
Look at all the cars today. So boring, bland, they all look the same. Well take a look at the cars 50 years ago, 60 years ago, or whenever. There was a style, a pattern people followed based on what everyone else was doing, and today thats what they're doing again. You look at a brand new toyota camry. Bleh. looks like everything else. OH yeah? Take a chevy monte carlo, nova and malibu and try to tell them apart if they're 30-40-50 years old. Easier if you lived back then, which I didnt.

Now take coins. Barber designs were laughed at and ridiculed when they came out. Ok let's be honest, the Barber design is cool, but it's not amazing. Its a liberty head, something that is not new, with a wreath on the back. both old ideas. Yet nowadays people have a whole flippin society dedicated to them. Nothing wrong with that! But back then people woulda been all "Liberty's overused, we don't want some nonexistent woman on our coins!"


Well today things have turned around, and collectors want liberty back. Why? Because they like the old coins. I'm not going to explain why we like old coins. If you're reading this you probably already know.

In the future your kids and grand kids will collect with pride and earnest what you consider "dull" and "uniform". Look at Seated Liberty coinage. Dollar, half, quarter, dime, Half Dime. Uniform? The definition.

Some of my favorite designs are the big European coppers with little artwork on them. So next time you say that our coins are "losing detail" or "cheesy and gimmicky", think about how you would react if the coin was 70 years old.

Thank you.

I think US coins from the XX century are quite unique in terms of relief; compared to other countries in the same period. From the top of my head I can't think of any other country that had designs with so much depth of field. And in my opinion: you are right, the old Washington quarter, for example, is far nicer than the new flat design.

Said that, I guess flat designs age much better when it comes to the lifetime of the coins; since the wear tends to be more even and slower in flat coins, and these retain most of the legends until very low grades.