Right, not all colorized pieces are equally bad. Here is a modern (Finnish) example where color is part of the mint design but used very subtly: http://www.mint.fi/en/documents/2237/Suomenlippu+T_A+kopio.jpg But I am still in the "dislike" camp. Christian
I voted neutral... If done by the issuing mint, then I do not mind; but, if done outside of the mint (usually as an overpriced promotion) then I am opposed.
I put dislike because usually when this is mentioned is done by someone other than a mint. There are some coins with color by a mint that are attractive.
I dislike it. IMHO paint on a coin just looks gross...wow...that word just popped into my head. I can't even remember when the last time was I used it. :goof:
Garbage, and I wouldn't even pay face value for them. That applies whether the colorization was done post-mint, or done officially by any mint (for example, Canada and others). Having multicolored paper money is just fine, but I firmly believe it is just disgustingly ugly on coins.
YES! on both of those. Ick. Looks so horribly tacky and artificial; it looks like something was added that just doesn't belong there. Though put those images on a piece of paper, then we'll talk. Or just have that design minted on the coin without fingerpainting the thing; that would actually look pretty nice!
I have to agree here. Both those images are beautiful but, like Troodon said, should be on paper (canvas). Colored coins just don't turn me on. It's kinda like putting color to an old black and white movie. It's the same movie but I just don't enjoy watching it.
I don't think that bird would be effective on paper. It's designed for a coin and is a unique art piece. I think people are just used to what they know. If you'd had lived in Ancient Athens all the statues would be painted with color but today the paint is gone and your used to viewing such things as monochromatic. Color is an essential part of any art form. Ruben
When I started this poll, It's intention was to be in reference to third party/unofficial colorized coins.
Its funny that I saw this thread because I just received my first two painted coins from the Canadian Mint. I have never been one to even consider colorized coins, but after I saw these, I liked the design too much and thought what the heck. So the jury is not back yet...... I still can't decide whether I like them or not. Personally, I think they would have looked gorgeous without the paint, but the paint definitely brings out the details. But now this raises a whole new issue with grading and imperfections. I don't know how many of you scour a new coin when you purchase a coin from the mint. You start looking for all the minor imperfections on the coin.... any tiny nicks, scratches, marks, etc.......So this still applies, but now you have to worry not only about the "underlay" of the coin, but now about the "overlay" of the coins..... any nicks of paint or areas where the paint did not stick, scratches on the paint, etc. The only thing that gives me peace of mind is that I don't hold foreign coins to the same high standards as I do the US Mints coins. When I buy a foreign coin, I buy it for my personal collection and don't worry about the value. If there is a nick or scratch, oh well.... but if this were a US coin from the mint, I would be sending it back in a heart beat. I ended up voting neutral.
I voted dislike. As a new member gonna throw my 2 cents in on this one. I dislike colorized coins and I do not like seeing color put on currency at all. What I really dislike is seeing the actual design of a coin altered by the colorized process two good examples of this are the Tennessee Statehood Quarter with the image of Elvis colorized over the actual design or the SAE with a scenery background. However I do like the hand enameled coins as long as it is done on Military Challenge coins or special occasion coins only. Unlike the colorized process hand enameled coins can be chemically stripped to remove the color leaving the alloy unharmed.