Variants mentioned in the numista catalog

Hi,

I just got this coin: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces474.html

and I see there are 4 types indicated:

Full lawn
Missing lawn
50% lawn
No tree

Now that's mighty good, but why isn't there images showing what it's all about?  Specially since they are NOT mentioned in the SCWC, it would have been a good deed of the person entering this coin to specify ALL 4 of the types, no?

How can you accept such types without a certain proof of their existence. Make a link to the images or whatever in the description, please.

This complaint is general and not only about this specific coin.

Ole

Ole,

I recognise this complaint and should I ever manage to get my way...we'll get this type of information on coin sheets!

Your expertise in variants is impressive and a real asset to the site.

Hi,

and why wouldn't you get your way? It's only the proper way to do it.

Did you ever try to integrate a "LINK" in the coin description? Maybe it just works without doing the proper thing at the LINE level?

Ole

What's the chances of you ever getting your way? We are waiting in anticipation...

The variants should be in catalogue with pictures. We have talked so much about it and Sjoelunds work in the matter has been impressive,  butcher forum posts about variants just get lost in traffic in the end. We need pictures in coin info....

Hi,

in the FREE TEXT FIELDS in the coin description you can actually paste an url (link), how it'll look afterwards I do NOT know.

Now the question is, where the link points. Maybe somewhere in the "numisdoc" section it would be possible to make a sub-section for images of variants, and then let the link point to the specifically needed documentation?

Ole

Sadly it won't work, at least the way I tried it once.

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces16331.html

Hi,

a good try and copying the https://static-numista.com/forum/images/miniatures/53ad9fecc1d8a.jpg into my browser, I came up with this:



OK, it's not an easy way, but it's better than nothing, I should think?

Ole

Hi,

maybe we can have a new "chapter" in numisdoc to add the variant documentations into, just the jpg. Then it would be possible to link a coin description to the documentation somehow.

What Idolenz made is "dirty" work-a-round but it works obviously, although fastidious. If we in the general text of the coin description just could give the link to the documentation, it would be fabulous, but if that can NOT be done, then at least a reference in words to the numisdoc section "variant documentations" would be good enough until a better solution has been set up.

There are two questions left:

1. Who can add such a section in numisdoc?
2. Who will and can
2a. move the documentation to numisdoc?
2b. add the reference to the general coin description?

I don't know how the country moderator responsibilities are given and how much access power they have, but it would be natural, that the moderators should be given that job. If not, then it might risk to end up in a mess...

Ole

Hi,

have a look here, a mail from Kuna from may this year:

It should stay as only one coin page but you can add pictures of different subtypes to edge, with note.
 For example, look how did I solve that problem:
 https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2490.html or https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2378.html
Just make it all in one photo. using Paint or any other program.
Regards
 Kuna


his first link: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2490.html
his second link: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2378.html

KUNA obviously has the solution we need:D   I'll send him a PM and show him this thread, then maybe he'll explain all of us how to make the wonder happen

Ole

Verweis : SjoelundHi,

have a look here, a mail from Kuna from may this year:

It should stay as only one coin page but you can add pictures of different subtypes to edge, with note.
 For example, look how did I solve that problem:
 https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2490.html or https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2378.html
Just make it all in one photo. using Paint or any other program.
Regards
 Kuna


his first link: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2490.html
his second link: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2378.html

KUNA obviously has the solution we need:D   I'll send him a PM and show him this thread, then maybe he'll explain all of us how to make the wonder happen

Ole

Since nobody can add another field to the coin pages, I found this solution. If possible, someone can add another field with all descriptions and where photos could be placed. But it doesn't exist and I know it will not appear in near future. If you want to do this like me, you need to collect all pictures about this coin. Then, using Paint or any other program for photo editing, from many pictures, you just need to make one. After that, you can simply upload it to the coin page.

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1272.html

Here is a good example and here are 2 pictures made into 1 picture.
Regards
Kuna
p.s. If you don't understand, feel free to PM me.

Hello,

May I make another suggestion ?
I think Kuna's idea to paste pictures is the right one. Even cut in 4 parts for 4 variants, a picture will still be much better than lots of tiny pictures posted currently on the site. It is lot of work but really worth it.

I use the GIMP for that, an excellent freeware you can download for any platform, I could write a little doc, "Gimp for Numismatics"  

However, 2 points:
1. I'd suggest to put the composed photo main + variants as the main obverse/reverse picture, even if it will differ from the general aspect of Numista sheets.
I feel it is better than combining to the "edge" field.
Of course, a variants field would be the best but you know...

Take this coin https://fr.numista.com/catalogue/pieces39842.html

I recently asked for a precision on a line because of a variation (!!!!) so big it should be a different coin, drapped-armoured versus naked bust. The picture could be:



to replace the single type there is now, with the same reverse.

2. What are variants ? Be carefull not to fall in the "token trap" and to have each a definition of variant, and after 3 years at the "variant-gate" war   So that point should be aggreed upon before.
I take for example Kuna's last case, an error coin. Are errors variants ?
And I don't think error coins are registered anywhere on the site (I may be wrong). Though it could be a nice move.

Hope it helps,

André

Hi André,

you bring in some very good questions.

I also use Gimp, but I'm not an expert at all, so yes, it would be very nice with a documentation "Gimp for Numismatics".

Here are the categories of documentation, which we (a small group of people and I) have applied on the site:
https://sites.google.com/site/coinvarietiescollection/home

c = Counterfeits
d = Documentation
e = error
m = Mintmark
v = Variant

c = Counterfeit
Counterfeit coins with images and the differences to the genuine coin (if it exists). That is to say that also so called "fantasy" coins are included. Here an example:
Counterfeit:

Fantasy:


Documentation:


Error:



Mint mark:
In many cases mint marks are placed in places you wouldn't even know, and when some coins from the same year doesn't have a mint mark it's difficult to know where to look.

here it's easy, bacause all the coins of this year have a mint mark


Variant:


Sometimes it's not that easy to determine, which category a coin falls into, but then nobody ever said life is easy...

We still have the issue of WHO can bring the images into the general coin description?

Ole

Hello again,
I've seen on the forum that this variants issue was indeed not new.
Does anyone know if a text link to an external site in the coin description works ?
It does not work to a Numista picture. But external ?
Sometimes there are "Notes".
Lets make a test asking a temporary modification of a coin sheet adding a link to dropbox where one of Ole's beautiful pictures is stored. We need an active willing-to-try referee  

In fact even if the link does not work, you still have the url, all you need is paste it in your browser and you get to Ole's sheet.

Maybe is that the best and most simple (until better times come for Numista) if Ole wishes to keep and maintain his dropbox collection.  Do you ? And this could go for variants, errors, counterfeits etc provided the "original coin is on Numista.

And sorry to older users of Numista if I repeat things that were already said   it is not always simple to find previous discussions on the forum.

Cheers,

André

Hi André,

it's actually another member (Marc Kuppens) of our small variants group, who's reponsible for the drop-box. The rest of us just delivers to all the group and he's then proof reading and storing them. I'll go on delivering, whenever I have something "new", which is quite often by the way.

What we need is to make Kuna's idea known to rest of the referees and have them to add the images like Kuna has shown so beautifully.

Ole

I would be very happy if you guy can pull it out. I would love to see variants in catalog.

Hello Ole, Kuna, Idolenz and others interested in the topic,

This variant issue has to be discussed with the team and moderators.
I want here to suggest to compile with this thread places and ways variants have been described so far, and the www sites that people use for that. This should help to decide something for numista. At least to get prepared.

For a start:
1. https://sites.google.com/site/coinvarietiescollection/home Ole's et al.
2. http://monnaiesetvarietes.esy.es/ Cobra's in french
3. https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2378.html an example by Kuna using the "edge" field in Numista
4. There is the way some older coins are handled, ex. this french coin with larg number of lines https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces483.html This is nothing else than dealing with variants. Maybe accepted because french  
5. There was also discussion on edge variants recently when A and B edge variants were removed.
I can't find the thread but basically the variants were treated as additional lines.
6. The Maria Theresia 1780 thaler variants http://www.theresia.name/en/index.html
7. This link for Indian coins http://britishcoins.indian-coins.com/

And there are tons. Which maybe indicates that it is an illusion to put all in Numista ? Maybe the links way is the best ? Or in Numista for simple cases and links for more complex onces ??

There are also lots of related posts that can't be all listed. I tried to find some general ones. But search on Variation or variants in the forum will give lots. ex.
https://en.numista.com/forum/topic22391.html

You're welcome to post here the cases and links you know. And further suggestions.

Thanks, André

As long as Numista stays this stagnant (programming the code wise) it would be best to use a link to a site that can be modified and you can put on as many information and pictures as needed. This way you have a bit more freedom, it can not be so easyly deleted and you don't clutter the coin sheets with to much secondary information stuff.
I dont dislike the "Edge Information" but it will be a bit more work and you always need the approval even for minor aesthetic changes in the pictures.
At least that is the way I see it.

For the moment all our suggestions and possible solutions are on the table, so I suppose we just have to wait and see  Maybe Father XMas will give us the awaited solution from the programming team, ah?

Ole

Just one additional info: what proportion of the coins do you estimate have variants ? Appart from those that already have a specific KM number (KM# XX.yy)
5, 25, 50 % ?
And maybe not considering error coins as variants ?

I'll bring this thread to the french forum to get more input.

Regards,

André

Bonjour André,

honnettement je ne sais pas, c'est certainement moins que 1%. Autour d'un per mille je pense, malheureusement je ne peux pas les conter dans ma collection, car je n'ai pas un indicateur pour ca dans ma collection de 35.500 pieces avec les variants et erreurs inclus.

Je vais penser a ca, peut-etre je peux compter mes documentations et utiliser le regle de 3.

Honestly I don't know, it's certainly less than 1%. I should think around 1 per thousand, unfortunately I haven't a field indicating this in my collection of 35.500 coins including the variants and errors.

I'm going to think about it, maybe I can count my documentations and then use the rule of 3.

A+

Ole

Hi André,

I just went to the French side of the forum, and I saw that the two sides are really seperated, so the French speaking never see the variants I post here. OK, I know that COBRA (Michel) has his site in French, but we don't often overlap in our documentations, so my French friends are missing out on quite a few variants.

I suppose, that if the variants came into the coin descriptions, then they would serve both sides (French / English), wouldn't they?

Did you ask COBRA about his percentage opinion?

A+

Ole

Hello Ole,

Yes I am afraid it is true, the membrane between the fora (proper latin plural ha) is rather impermeable, not completely but ... Languages and habits. And I have no bright idea to change that.  

And indeed if your composed pictures, Kuna's, Cobra's etc, show up in the coin descriptions, that will be for all.

No I did not ask Cobra for his evaluation.

Do you consider edge variants also in your evaluation ? What is called edges A and B in french (writen legend readable either with Obverse or reverse up). I would suspect there are always edge variants if the process of making the edge is separate from the rest of the process.

The point is that if we talk of  1 per 100 of the coins, it is ok to use the edge field + some links in some major cases + ask for extra lines for variants as has already been done for quite a few coins (and was previously done for edges A and b but was removed   ). It might not be worth to ask for structural changes for 500 cases. Better defend the use of the edge field.

I start tonight to put together and translate the elements of this thread to send it to the other forum. Then we'll wait Paris reactions  

Cheers,

André

Done :

https://fr.numista.com/forum/topic35527.html

Enjoy the reading   

Hello,

To make the info easily available, I copy here the relevant part of the "instructions to edit Numista Catalog ..."
==============================
Year – Mint letter - Quantity - Comment
    Use one line per issue. There can be several lines per year in case of several varieties. Only varieties that are described in general catalogs should appear, not too specific changes nor errors. The minor varieties can be specified by each collector as a "personal comment".
    For each mintage, type:

        The year showing on the coin. If no date shows, put it in the comment and use the minting date if known.
        The mint letter.
        If the mint is represented by a drawing instead of a letter, leave this field blank and specify the drawing and/or the mint in the comment field.
        The quantity: Total number of coins minted that year with that letter
        Comment (optional). You may describe the specifics of that mintage. Give the full KM like KM#3.1, KM#3.2 or KM#3.3. Duplicate the full same comment on each line if required.
        The comment should not include comments about your own coin specimen (grade, stike error, etc.), comments about edge orientation or comments about the coin type instead of a specific year's issue.
        Comment can include the date in the original alphabet to help identification.

    Examples
    Year: 1385
    Mint letter: W
    Quantity: 3,524,000
    Comment: ١٣٨٥ - KM# 3.1 (small nose)

Italics are mine. Text can be interpreted. e.g. the term "general catalog"

Cheers,

André

An additional test.
I had this coin description modified to test the use of the edge field:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces39842.html

What do you think ?

André

In this topic you show off some of the most clear variants that you have found, well done! I see however so many nugatory variants which no normal person can see unless he uses a magnifying glass or microscope that you really have to explain me how much you pay to Krause to get these in their books. With all respect, I consider these as trash. I wouldn't like it to see all of these small variants in the Numista catalog as it will make the catalogue unnecessarily confusing. By that also many collectors on here don't even collect these things so I am against it that all of these things are being added (although the self-proclaimed new Numista leader thinks they are awesome).

Hi,

thanks for your opinion, there are more variant collectors than you think.....

Ole

Euromount  I find the cataolg more confusing if they just put variants or just a few words about the variant.  To me it should be in  calalog, or in numisdoc. Them in catalog put see numisdoc. Iam a variant collecter. Not everone is, i know. Your thoughts are very inportent. We all collect differently. Me i would like to see proofs taken out of catalog and only shown if you hit non-ciruation coins.To me they are not coins. they are made for collectors and not for every day use. But what can you do.

Hello,
Maybe for a start would it be nice to get to an agreement on how to show major variants.
eg sometimes large letters or small letters, if you have only one, you dont know.
or bold legend etc.
There are referees for countries, a member of the team could similarly take in charge the decision for a start on those .

Cheers,
Andre

Hi all,

Seems solved  

See last on

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic37072.html

Now lets make use of all those great pictures we have to document variants !

André

I am not so sure

Ole