| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 2,002 |
|
|
New Member
Canada
7 Posts |
Good day all. Title has my Q!!
The way I currently store my paper bills is in order by year (ie, 1937 $1's, then 1937 $2's, 1937 $5's, 10's, 20's, 50's, 100's, then 1954 $1's, 1954 $2's, $5's etc. etc.)
I was starting to wonder what it would be like if I did them all by denomination, ie - 1937 $1's, 1954 $1's, 1967 $1's, 1973 $1's, then on to all the $2's, $5's etc.
(Hope that all makes sense!!)
Curious what you picked and why - if you have pros/cons for each as well would be great.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7273 Posts |
I do both. For us based notes as all are the same size, I store by year. Basically I have a pile of obsolete>fractional>large size> small size
My Portuguese notes on the other hand are all different size so I store by denomination as smaller denominations are smaller and larger are larger.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2571 Posts |
I usually sort by Series. I only collect Bank of Canada for my CDN collection so that my first notes are from 1935 $1.00 and go up to my highest denomination. My largest sets go by their Charlton numbers (with lowest number & designations first - unless I have a matched serial number pair). So you will see the earliest signature combinations first etc.
On my world collection, I have the nations in alphabetical order & the notes sorted by their P# (which is lowest denomination first to higher denominations last).
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
17879 Posts |
With US notes I have $1 bills first in date order, then $2 bills in date order, then $5, $10 and $20. I only have small size US bills so that's quite easy. With some countries I arrange the bills by size rather than denomination, to suit the album pages I have.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
357 Posts |
I agree with NumisRob and do the same.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
74 Posts |
I only collect the BOC era notes, and originally I went by series, leaving spaces for replacement notes, etc.
A month or so ago I rearranged so that I am now ordered by denomination, regular/commemorative notes first, test/replacement/error notes in order after the main group (i.e. all the $1 notes from 1935->1973 including the '67 commemoratives, then the $1 replacements/test/error notes, then on to the $2, etc.)
A few reasons I did this ... first I have more holes than fills in my series... Some denominations like $1, $2, $5 are well represented even down to signature pairs, but the others are pretty sparse. Aggregating by denomination allows me to see the progress more clearly. The higher denomination holes don't bother me, I just pay attention to the wins at that range and not how far I have to go.
Next, although I did like seeing the series designs together, I am also interested to see how certain notes change over time. The polymer $10 series and $20 series now each have several designs, with more frequent design changes expected to fight counterfeiters. Organizing by denomination lets me see these changes more clearly.
Finally, and this is certainly least, organizing by denomination means my book is organized by colour which feels neater and tidier.
At the front of my book I keep an index that is organized by series, so if that's how I'm shopping that day, I'm good to go.
Who knows. As I "complete" a series I may change my mind yet again and reorganize.
Edited by SteveInCanada
08/07/2022 2:52 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2571 Posts |
Quote:
Who knows. As I "complete" a series I may change my mind yet again and reorganize. -The most active & savvy collectors I know organize & re-organize their collections more regularly than the average collector. This & getting nice binders (or boxes) to keep them in are one of the best favours you can do for yourself if you value your collection, or wish to build one that is the envy of other collectors. (I often recommend organizing before learning to grade since learning to grade takes time). I'm not promoting competition (b/c its not about that) but rather the self-education (finding your gaps/setting realistic collector goals). It teaches one to be flexible too. For example, I prefer my collection showing from oldest to newest (& by denomination) but I have matching radars from the Original & Upgraded Journey $5 which I want to keep together. Aesthetics trumps my original organizing principal. |
|
Moderator
 Australia
16805 Posts |
I don't really have enough Canadian banknotes for it to make terribly much difference, but I sort them by denomination. This matches how I store my coins.
My database auto-sorts itself by year, which does mean the coins and notes are all scrambled together; I need to set the substance filter to "paper" OR "polymer" to see just the banknotes.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
867 Posts |
I file them by catalogue number. Which is about the same as series denomination
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3402 Posts |
By denomination...type...series.
KK
|
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
I am different for my countries.
NZ, Australia and Britain like you guys - Series eras and then denomination.
But for all my Pacific Island nations, I do it different, I do it by denominations over all series, so like all the Fijian dollars from 1969 to 1990, then $2 1969 to 2007 and so on. Just do it for a bit of spice. I don't have any Canadian notes and only 2 ratty condition US dollar notes, one from about 2006 and a 1957 silver certificate.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
629 Posts |
I sort my banknotes just like you do Tarik!
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 2,002 |
|
Posted 06/04/2022 4:58 pm
