MustangJoni

When we are working on our 10 year, 888, 999 projects, we are limited to the 24 color translucent chart. I was looking at that coin used with the grit, after Anne posted. It would be great if it could be done with half raised feature. If you used the numbers, you couldn't see them with glow. And have 13 - 24 on back

I would love to have a set of translucent coins. I would love to see a coin that had like...pie slices of each color, then a number half raise, and maybe a recessed feature to see what they would look like under the enamel.

Ours came in today. Thank you Oak Coins and Mark! I haven't heard from Wanna yet if she accepts my arm wrestling challenge for it.

Thanks Joni but the Mardi Gras coin isn't really my color choice. I really love the Texas coin and am very happy with it. I would like to say that I wasn't trying to complain and ruin it for the hosts of future events. I was just stating that I think maybe Oak Coins should have put more thought into their gift giving. It is a very nice gesture on their part. I just feel like since we split the cost of the order, the coin won't be mine. We should get together and decide who gets it. Just because it will arrive in my mail box, does not make me the owner of the coin. We were partners in the event. Maybe arm wrestle for it.

I appreciate that Oak is giving these coins to the hosts for this event. With all the complaints logged, I'm sure it will be the last time it happens. Wanna, I'm willing to give mine up if you want it.

Seems kinda odd that you would do 25 coins for someone and not get paid for them. I thought I remembered AE versions of several of these coins?

Yep But I am not the one handing out the coins, but will send a friendly email to Emma on your behalf. It would be a lot cheaper to get the Mardi Gras coin by joining the club then by buying coins for the event!

I misunderstood this statement earlier, and now I finally get it. What I meant when I said that I didn't buy based on art, is that I don't buy a coin based on the mint art of the coin. I want to see a sample. There have been several coins that I committed to buy based on the art, then was disappointed when I got the actual coin.

yes, it is a difference of opinion. because a geocoin is by definition small, too much detail obscures the design and the use of so much soft enamel in little bits and pieces keeps the elements separate instead of blending. is the design based on an illustration because that would explain joni's comment. rsg The books I read as a child had very busy covers! lol I do agree about the soft enamel. These would be a must have coin if the were IHE. Oh, and translucent where the water is, using half raised, or recessed metal to do the details underwater.

I hope I am speaking about the correct coins, but I am assuming that by the Moab - Non-trackable, you mean the beautiful silver coin that The Caching Place put out? At that time, they also did one in black nickel that was trackable. It sold out quickly. Then they minted Hopi coin, which was basically the same design, but was done on a round coin. Edit to add: Here is a link to my trackable. It has a picture of the coin: http://www.geocaching.com/track/details.aspx?id=1627118

I really wish these were not soft enamel. I'm a huge Jules Verne fan, and the coin are gorgeous, but I don't buy based on art. I rarely will buy a pre-sale.

Scheduled for 2nd week of June, btw Joni And I'm making lots of coins for people to take to GW8. But I myself won't have anything. You can find me a the Geocoin Poker game for a brand new Poker coin that we'll be debuting at the event. Can't wait to see all the new coins. TMA Yippee!

Hedge Hopper and I will be there. We will be staying at the Marriott in Redmond also. We have to be near the coins. I won't have a coin, but Hedge Hopper has a killer new personal coin that should be here by then. I have to say that it is awesome!!!

gotcha. but you better stay away from my daffodils. Your photos are beautiful!

after reading odessy's and joni's i have to say i agree with the most part. the part i have the hardest time with is looking at a photograph, making a painting from that photo, perhaps changing the background a little, but the essential areas are the same, almost exactly the same. where any unbiased person, like a judge, could look at the photo and at the painting and see the blatant similarities. if someone could direct me to which part of the copyright law it says what percentage of the original must be changed in order to make it ok, i would appreciate it. the analogy to an interieor decorator is flawed. when a furniture designer puts out a chair, he knows that chair is going to be used in a room, designed by someone else. i think there would be a serious issue if the first chair was designed using a specific pattern of fabric, created exclusively for that chair and someone else copied that cloth to use in their own chair. my favorite example. especially when one can find the original photo. a coin designer can use clip art, royalty free art etc to design their coin. but i don't think they can use someone else's protected art to incorporate into a coin. and let's be really clear, a piece of art is copyrighted when it is created. no special steps are needed to protect that copyright. your roadrunner is a good example of using a variety of legal sources to create your coin. but i have a serious problem with someone cutting and pasting the head off a copyrighted piece of roadrunner art and sticking it on their own work. is this legal? - maybe in the grey area. is it ethical? hmmmm, i don't think so. that includes photographing a giant roadrunner and using that as your RR coin. the art you photographed is protected! there are so many free sources of art out there, why tamper with something that is not free. why paint a copy of a photo and call it your own work and then design a coin around it. the roadrunner looks as if it is the right way to go, a generic roadrunner doing the road running thing. but not the warner bros cartoon copy. that way be dragons with lawyers if they want to get nasty. as to reinventing the wheel. of course artists should be reinventing the wheel, that is why they are called artists/architects and not draftsmen. sure, it is ok to use clip art of a bunch of animals running around in a circle, i can see not reinventing that particular wheel. why draw a little teeny giraffe if there is clip art available. but if you copy a photo of a giraffe in a gaggle of giraffes standing under those funky trees in africa to use in your coin, that is not reinventing the wheel, that is plagiarism. i get letters from high school kids, 2 or 3 times a year, asking for permission to make a painting of this cowboy or that. i tell them no. go have your own life experiences, take your own photographs, paint what you know, don't "copy" my work, my life experiences and skills. develop your own. i usually get a letter from the art teacher demanding why i didn't allow little suzy to paint cowboy ted or cowboy basil. i tell her the same thing. but at least they asked permission. whether or not they refrained from using my work, well, an ethical teacher wouldn't allow it just because the medium was going to be different. she would honour the copyright. reinvent that wheel. if someone can't be original with their design, then skip the coin. gosh, this really has merged the two discussions together. rsg I am agreeing with you. Copyrights protect artists. I know you are a photographer, and your work should be protected. You worked hard to create it. My point is that there is a difference between a copyright photo and and item. If you photograph a baseball, that doesn't mean that I can't draw a baseball. Odds are that my drawing will resemble your photo, because it is a baseball.

I find myself to agree with RSG for the most part on copyright issues. I don't think I could ever bring myself to use a Warner Brothers image on something that I am doing. But I think it is more for fear of getting in trouble! LOL That being said, after I read RSG's question, I looked at your art, then I googled pictures of a roadrunner. Quite frankly, you could have taken your inspiration from hundreds of them! LOL I think a roadrunner is a roadrunner is a roadrunner. Unless it is in some famous pose, how can you really tell what photo it comes from? Same goes for horses. There are thousands of pictures of horses out there. Unless it is in some pose, such as winning a race, or something readily identifiable, how can you tell where it came from? The opposite is also true. If you hand draw a picture of a horse, I'll bet you will be able to find a photo with a horse in the same pose. You may never have seen it before you drew the horse, but that doesn't change the fact that your drawing might be similar to a photo of a horse that someone has taken.

Yes, it is a bit annoying when people bring back a design over and over in different colors and metals just to make money. Absolutely agree with that statement! ~J no one has answered why this is a bad thing. most coin designers do it ALL the time. new colours, new metal combinations. does anyone think this is anything but a way to make money off the original design and dies of a successful coin? it is not for the generosity of spirit, otherwise coin designers would be selling coins for EXACTLY what they paid to have them minted. there is always profit, profit is a good thing. people, we live in a capitalist society so can we really point fingers at someone who is being a capitalist? anyone who buys coins at one price and sells them for another is doing the same thing. i think folks are ticked off because tranquility prices have gone so high as to make them almost impossible for the average coin collector to obtain. i can't afford a bmw sports car that i would truly love to have, but that doesn't make me angry at those that can afford it. a little jealous perhaps, but not angry. such is the way of the world. rsg I have to agree with you on this. When I started collecting, we were a community of traders. When I bought a couple of coins, I could count on the extras I bought being traders, and being able to get coins I missed. Supplies were that limited. Now, we mint and mint until everyone can buy one. Along the way, prices have skyrocketed. Trades are few and far between. Why trade when you can buy? Which is a shame since I valued the relationships I built by trading. But things fade away, and we all get on with life. But this coin, they could mint in 1000 new metals, and give them away, and I still wouldn't add one to my collection. Way too much drama from the folks who bring drama in everything they do.

I think you have some great ideas. You might consider working with an artist so your ideas can really shine.

that is probably true. if it is indeed work for hire. then it is yours. i hope you got that in writing. on the other hand, the city of barstow hired me to do a shoot for them, they got some physical photos and shared copyright. they can do with them as they wish, and so can i. it is all in the fine print. and also, where did paula get the design. from her imagination? cool, from a photograph? hmmmm, tricky. rsg Yes, I have the agreement in writing via our emails, and now a backup from Jim, who now owns Geocoin Design. I had always assumed that she drew the design I asked her to, but became a little worried after seeing the Lady Luck coin, and similarities to another piece of art.

It has nothing to do with opinion, it has to do with the law. This happened to me with the GeoSmurfz coin. It doesn't matter how or if I bought it. If it is considered contraband or counterfeit then it can be sold on the open market. Just because I bought it doesn't make it ok that I can sell it. Did that answer your question or did you have something more specific? This is interesting. My assumption, which may be wrong, is that Castleman originally had permission to mint the Tranquility coin. The disagreement between the artist and manufacturer came later. The agreement seems to be over payment for design, not permission to mint the design. I have heard from GCG. I had commissioned Paula to do art for me several years ago, and he made it clear that the art I commissioned belongs to me. I paid for it.

You know in thinking about this, I don't think there is much that can be done. I believe these were originally sold by Castleman. Even if they weren't sold in his store, they were sold to the masses. They've been sold and re-sold and traded. So I don't see why I can't sell it. I can see if I wanted to use the art to create another coin, or a pathtag, or something different. If I bought a Picasso, I can sell it, but I can't reproduce it, and sell prints of it.

Huh? We can be restricted from selling something we bought? Are you going to take this stand with other coins you are producing? I say this, and I don't own a Tranquility coin, but the implications of this are scary.

That is beautiful. I hope I can get my hands on one!

You would be surprised who will buy a coin. In my area, most the people who buy the coins I offer at the events aren't coin collectors. They just want a souvenir for the event. I've sold out on the 999 and 10th anniversary coins.

I do like this idea very much. I think we have lost the front of the coin that was shown, but I do like the idea of showing the individual cache types.