| Author |
 Replies: 28 / Views: 2,804 |
|
Valued Member
United States
199 Posts |
Can you appreciate why die cracks should get names now and be listed as as varieties?
|
|
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
Love 'em all. Don't quite see the problem with the 3 drunken oarsmen though.  |
|
Valued Member
 United States
199 Posts |
The Oarsmen you have to enlarge by clicking the picture.The die crack is near the bow of the boat.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day,
the only reason to use a word is to convey a meaning to others. It is useless, unless the meaning is standardized. That's why we have dictionaries, and the CCF provides a Glossary - to which we may all offer our contributions.
In numismatics, "variety" has a meaning. "Error" has a meaning. They are different. Therefore you create unnecessary confusion when you say -
"... die cracks should get names now and be listed as as varieties?"
Die cracks are errors. They are not varieties.
I agree that they deserve a system of classifaction. Numbers would work, but names are so much more descriptive and, often, very amusing and, therefore, memorable. "Drunken oarsmen" and "Spitting buffalo" are creditable examples.
All that remains is for a systematic cataloguing of known errors, leaving room for those yet to be discovered.
But, please, don't mis-apply words that already have a meaning.
Peter in Oz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
199 Posts |
|
|
Formerly nancyc
Australia
5385 Posts |
Here in Oz we have given quite a few errors descriptive names, not necessarily die cracks though. Eg: Rabbit Ears, Spew Roo, Poo Roo, Lizard Mouth, Roozilla, Goatee Roo, Boxing Roo, to name just a few. I'm sure there's more, but can't think of them just now.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day, I'm not having it both ways.
The fact that others use the words indiscriminately and incorrectly, doesn't make them correct, and the rest of us ought to resist the temptation to be drawn into bad habits.
What is the point of cataloguing these errors, if the names are then used in relation to the wrong coins ... ? So, having given something a name stick to it. And errors are different from varieties. One coin might be both an example of a variety, and have one or more errors, but if we don't keep the words separate, there'll be no way to describe that.
Peter in Oz
|
|
Valued Member
United States
199 Posts |
That is just one example I can give you more.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
936 Posts |
I do not know a lot about errors but do know there is a book on Cuds, each one of them are assigned a number, I guess if someone wanted they could do the same for die cracks? Assigning a number is just the same as assigning a name I guess. Of course I know nothing about die cracks and maybe they are not like varieties and can not be assigned a number or name. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Errorist - You could give as many as you like, but that still doesn't change the fact that they are not technically die varieties or varieties.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
199 Posts |
So why is it good for some and not for all?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
499 Posts |
Just because someone says the sky is purple doesn't make it so. There are people that ignore the "industry standards" all the time. This doesn't make them right. Some of the confusion comes, I think, from the attribution of VAMs. Often a die crack is used in the identification of a variety. The crack may be the identifier but it is not the variety. If you wanted to endeavor to label all the die varieties in a given year for cents then the cracks could be used as identifiers for a certain state of a die. If you labeled a die "117" then the die crack would likely be labeled "117a" and if it formed into a chip or Cud "117b". The crack and the Cud would be considered an error on the variety not the variety itself. Naming cracks, chip, or Cuds on the other hand is merely a marketing strategy. It's easier to get some one's interest in a "crack head Lincoln" than it is to get interest in a "117a". This probably further confuses the issue but I tried. Richard Ziegler |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
quote:
How can you have it both ways? Example 1807 cent die crack "Comet variety".
You are confusing die markers with die varieties. The "comet" is a die marker of the S-271 die variety. The Sheldon number is what describes the variety, not the gouge, however dramatic it may be. Please do not compare common cracks on massed produced modern junk( State Quarters with mintages of 300+ million) to highly collectible and sought after 200+ year old large cent varieties. No one will EVER catalog or collect State Quarters by die variety simply because too many dies were used and the value will never be there to make it worthwhile. Seriously though, if you start cataloging and naming die cracks on modern coins, you will soon come up with a book that will make the KM world coin catalog look like the coupon flyer in the Sunday newspaper  I don't think you are creative enough to come up with a million or so individual names nor is anyone else. That is why I appreciate them for being what they are- minor errors and nothing else. Edited by biokemist6
10/18/2007 1:43 pm
|
|
Forum Mom
 United States
5877 Posts |
You beat me to it, Biochemist!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
Errorist - Instead of expending all this energy trying to bring value to that which has none, how about learning what does have value and work on looking for that.
Aside from that, if you like die cracks and think they are neat, go ahead and collect them, but don't expect everyone to follow. It's a well known fact that there is little or no value in any die crack no matter what.
|
| |
Replies: 28 / Views: 2,804 |
Posted 10/17/2007 4:26 pm
