Venezuela: 50 centimos 2007, y92, bold versus fine text [solved]

N#4538

Here is what is now in numista for the 2007 coins:

The second year line “Variation low details” is not documented!

Here is what my friend Allred1950 found, and then I documented his findings, when I got the physical coins from him a few days ago:

Since we already have two year lines, I suggest to use them both for this variant, which is documented.

What's your opinion?

Ole

It's documented here:  https://www.numismatica.info.ve/en/coins/mv50ctsf-aa.htm

What I want to know is why the 2012 composition is listed as unprotected steel.  That makes no sense for a modern coin.

Thanks for reminding me of that site. I have taken contact with them to get a written permission to use their materiel.

Until then this is not official

Great pictures on that website.

But then Ole's documentation coins look the same (I mean the pictures on the original documentation because it's changed now I see):

Any opinion about the 2012 composition?  

I think numista is wrong until I see a proof of the alloy,  @adanieluy @Jasanche

Schön also makes no difference in alloy between 2007 - 2009 - 2012 (at least not in my 2016 edition).

Same with the web site I got the pictures from. 

 Thank you Ole for taking care of those two Venezuela coins for me.  As i do not have the time right now.  Great read as rsirian a Essor Prof and you, found everything. Thank you all for the help.

            daryl  

Not sure if this helps, but here is my 50 centimos 2012 coin.

It is mag

wt  4.23 g

dia  21.99

thickness 1.79.

looks like the rest on the series.

Numista is wrong.  Maybe the one that added that as unplated steel had a defective planchet coin.

rsirian1

Numista is wrong.  Maybe the one that added that as unplated steel had a defective planchet coin.

Please make the CR.

Done. If not approved then we'll have to split 2012 to a new coin page.

Good morning,

I cannot find where the 2007 and 2012 compositions are different from the other years. In addition, the 2012 composition, to me, doesn't make sense. Steel is a mixture of iron and carbon, so that would make the 2012 composition 100% steel, right? (Albeit a higher carbon concentration)… It doesn't make sense.

I am removing the composition details from the yearlines and using the 2007 low details as the “Low-relief, bold letters” and the other 2007 line as the “High-relief, fine letters” variants.

Please let me know what you think and thank you all!

John

Agree. That 2012 composition is nonsense.  I already submitted CR's to fix that.

One suggestion (for you or Ole), The graphic and year line descriptions should be the same.

Normal relief/Low relief is on graphic, High-relief, fine letters/Low-relief, bold letters is suggested for year line comments. I don't think the letters should be mentioned.

rsirian1

Agree. That 2012 composition is nonsense.  I already submitted CR's to fix that.

 

One suggestion (for you or Ole), The graphic and year line descriptions should be the same.

 

Normal relief/Low relief is on graphic, High-relief, fine letters/Low-relief, bold letters is suggested for year line comments. I don't think the letters should be mentioned.

The modification have been approved. Thank you.

In looking at the images, it appears that the difference can be seen in the thickness of the letters easier than in the details, and then we can use the graphics prepared by Ole and Allred. In the alternative, we can use High/Low relief to be consistent with the local, Venezuelan, catalogue. 

Either way, let me know or send the CR and I'll approve it.  

From what I can see in the first graphic is that the high/low relief (seen on the horse) is the same low relief. I don't think we can say that high relief is always bold letters or vice versa. The high/low relief varieties are given here: https://www.numismatica.info.ve/en/coins/mv50ctsf-aa.htm#google_vignette and makes no mention of letter quality.

rsirian1

From what I can see in the first graphic is that the high/low relief (seen on the horse) is the same low relief. I don't think we can say that high relief is always bold letters or vice versa. The high/low relief varieties are given here: https://www.numismatica.info.ve/en/coins/mv50ctsf-aa.htm#google_vignette and makes no mention of letter quality.

Looking at the variant images side to side, it appeared to me that the bold letters went with the low relief, but you are correct. We can't say that the high relief always goes with the bold letters. But this also means that we could have four variants for this year, which I don't like at all. 

I'll mark the years Normal Relief and Low relief for now.

Thanks!