Probably been proposed before, but still, here it is. Would anyone else feel better if sub-type pictures would be included within the table? pictures can be somewhat smaller than the main picture above.
I prefer the overviews in Comments made by rsirian1 and Ole Sjoelund.
If I have a coin in my hands it is better to have one page to identify which variant I own instead of clicking x pictures and search for differences. With the pictures we have an easy and comfort way to identify variants
I think on each dateline page we could have a photo and further specific details.
For example, different descriptions, inscriptions, and catalogue numbers. Then a list such as the one on this page could be compiled automatically: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces48483.html
The diagrams for identifying varieties can of course stay, but I can't imagine how a diagram for identifying ~100 varieties like on the coin above could work. And who would do something of this complexity for thousands and thousands of coins...
Not that I would be against this at least as a proof that certain years exist but we would enlarge the needed space at least by an order of magnitude and if they are all on the same page rip mobile internet users (even if they are just thumbnails).
Probably some of the reasons Xavier was against this (I couldn't find the thread from years ago though).
Hi
Sjoelund, your pictures are truly great and very intuitive for easy recognition of coin differences, as long as there is small number of these varieties. I can say for me at least, if I see your picture explanation, I know this site was checked by an wholehearted expert. There is no medal for this work!
But when there are lets say 4-5 or more differences for one coin type, I guess even for you, this becomes a heavier task, the pictures are smaller, etc.
I guess there is no need to show subtype pictres on mobile devices, unless the users ticks a command to expand/show pictures. I guess this could be done in this manner, right?
LP
Απόσπασμα: "Idolenz"Not that I would be against this at least as a proof that certain years exist but we would enlarge the needed space at least by an order of magnitude and if they are all on the same page rip mobile internet users (even if they are just thumbnails).
Probably some of the reasons Xavier was against this (I couldn't find the thread from years ago though).
If the photos and additional information are available via a clickable link like the US coins, this wouldn’t be a loading problem in my opinion. But Xavier will know how to answer us, he’s the specialist ;)
Απόσπασμα: "mikimaus"Hi
Sjoelund, your pictures are truly great and very intuitive for easy recognition of coin differences, as long as there is small number of these varieties. I can say for me at least, if I see you picture explanation, I know this site was checked by an wholehearted expert. There is no medal for this work!
But when there are lets say 4-5 or more differences for one coin type, I guess even for you, this becomes a heavier task, the pictures are smaller, etc.
LP
Indeed, it happens that I even have to split up in several pages, which I don't like, because it becomes extremely difficult to follow, I think the worst I've made is this one:
I can't even follow it myself today..... when I sat it up, I could!
Απόσπασμα: "mikimaus"Hi
Sjoelund, your pictures are truly great and very intuitive for easy recognition of coin differences, as long as there is small number of these varieties. I can say for me at least, if I see your picture explanation, I know this site was checked by an wholehearted expert. There is no medal for this work!
But when there are lets say 4-5 or more differences for one coin type, I guess even for you, this becomes a heavier task, the pictures are smaller, etc.
I guess there is no need to show subtype pictres on mobile devices, unless the users ticks a command to expand/show pictures. I guess this could be done in this manner, right?
LP
You're right, if there are too many versions of a coin with a only one year line, then the documentation images tend to become smaller. Some variants are nearly impossible to see, specially on used coins, and they should not get their own year lines. We always have to think of the normal "type" collector, which will hopefully identify the year of his double coins, but never the variants, since they are of NO interest for him! We do not all collect the same way.
mikimausHi Sjoelund, your pictures are truly great and very intuitive for easy recognition of coin differences, as long as there is small number of these varieties. I can say for me at least, if I see your picture explanation, I know this site was checked by an wholehearted expert. There is no medal for this work! But when there are lets say 4-5 or more differences for one coin type, I guess even for you, this becomes a heavier task, the pictures are smaller, etc. I guess there is no need to show subtype pictres on mobile devices, unless the users ticks a command to expand/show pictures. I guess this could be done in this manner, right? LP
Edit, sorry, I had forgotten I already answered a long time ago? End Edit.
Have a look at my Uzbekistan graphics, they are hardly understandable, so I do agree with you:
5 som
5 som new
10 tyin
20 tyin
50 tyin
500 som
Normally, when more pages are needed, it's getting a bit messy!
