Author
Topic: What is Canada's ugliest or most beautiful note?  (Read 17259 times)
venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« on: December 24, 2004, 08:50:01 am »

Being a collector of Canadian paper money, I obviously believe that Canada has some very beautiful banknotes.  But there are a few that I find very ugly!

My pick for ugliest would be the 1954 $50 note - the colour is hideous and the design on the back is so BORING!  The subsequently issued $50 in 1975 however is a thing of beauty, in fact my favourite note.

What are your picks for the most ugly and most beautiful?

TheMonetaryMan
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 0
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2004, 09:53:13 am »

As far as obtainable notes go I have seen an AU (in full unfaded color) of the 1900/1902 $4 Dominion of Canada notes and they are very hard to top in terms of eye appeal.

Of course the Specimen of DC-36 has got to be at or near the top.

As for chartered notes it would kill me to pick just 1 or 2, there has to be at least 50 drop dead beautiful chartereds.

As far as "ugly", I cannot contemplate "ugly" and "money" together in the same thought.  :-*
« Last Edit: December 24, 2004, 09:56:14 am by TheMonetaryMan »
emsteph
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2004, 12:28:56 pm »

Great topic "venga50".

I think the ugliest note I've seen is the 1986 $2 note from the "bird" series (not to mention the whole series).

The nicest note I like is the 1937 $100 note. A lot of rich tones to it and well designed, espscially the front. Wished I owned one... :'( In general, I love the '54 series of notes. Most have vibrant colours and nice photos on the back.

:)
BWJM
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,027
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2004, 01:41:47 pm »

It'll take me a while to decide between the two, so for nicest notes, I'm going with both the 1937 $100 and 1954 $5.

On the note of 1954s, the colours started off quite vibrant with the Devils Face notes, but then as they were about to be replaced, the colours were quite faded in comparison.  The $1, $2 and $5 notes especially, but all of them to some degree.  This fading over time is in my opinion a terrible change made by the Bank.

For worst notes, it's either almost the entire Multicoloured series as a whole, or the faded 1954 notes.  The Birds notes were OK, I like the Journey notes, the 1937s mostly weren't my preference, and I haven't seen enough of the 1935s in person to get a good appreciation for them.  I'm not into Chartered notes, so I can't speak there either.  I've got a couple Dominion notes, but nothing to speak of.

BWJM, F.O.N.A.
Life Member of CPMS, RCNA, ONA, ANA, IBNS, WCS.
President, IBNS Ontario Chapter.
Treasurer, Waterloo Coin Society.
Show Chair, Cambridge Coin Show.
Fellow of the Ontario Numismatic Association.
wickedless
  • Guest
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2004, 02:07:47 pm »

I would have to say that the 1935 twenty dollar note is my choice for the nicest note ever printed, wish I had even a ratty one. This would be followed closely by the 1954 five dollar devils face, at least I was lucky enough years ago to purchase some in UNC shape when they were affordable. ;D As for the ugliest I would have to say the 1979 multicoloured 20 dollar note.
Dean
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 736
  • GO LEAFS GO!
« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2004, 02:33:18 pm »

My rankings for the most beautiful BoC notes are as follows:

1)1935 $20
2)1935 $25
3)1937 $5
4)2004 $20
5)1975 $50

Most beautiful Dominion/chartered notes...

1)1887 $2
2)1925 $5
3)1917 Canadian Bank of Commerce notes

The ugliest notes...

1)The whole Birds of Canada Series (the most boring, utilitarian series, not to mention some of the worst portraits ever)

2)1971 $10 (who wants to see an ugly oil refinery?)

3)1954 series (again utilitarian, but not as bad as the Birds series)

Overall, I am pleased with the Journey series.  It has nice portraits and vibrant colours.  The only thing I wish they would have done is include a little more design work on the backs of the notes.  They're a little plain IMO.  The BoC also missed a grand opportunity to commemorate the Queen's Golden Jubilee on the $50...what a shame (for collectors especially ) :-[

Cheers,
Dean.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2004, 11:36:43 pm by Dean »

jonathan
  • Guest
« Reply #6 on: December 24, 2004, 04:32:17 pm »

In my opinion, the 1969 $20 note is by far the most ugliest note the Bank of Canada has ever issued.  The 1979 issue $20 is a bit of an improvement, though.

As for the most attractive note, no doubt about it - the 1975 $50 (and any subsequent $50) is my "numero uno".

Hey, that's my 3 cents worth.  :)

Merry Christmas to all!

Jonathan  ;)
venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« Reply #7 on: December 24, 2004, 04:44:37 pm »

Yes, I have to agree with Dean and sid-63 that the Birds series is the least attractive series the BofC has put out.  They all look like play money and the portraits are laughable.  On the $100, Borden looks cock-eyed and on the $5, Laurier looks like Dr. Spock (I know, this has been pointed out before).  On the $2, QEII looks like some non-descript middle-aged lady.  I'm sure many a foreigner has looked at a Birds $2 bill and wondered who that woman was on the front of the note.

I guess I'm fondest of the multicoloured series 'cuz that's the series I grew up with and I used to look forward to getting a 1971 $10 every week for my allowance.  So that ugly oil refinery (sorry Dean) brings back nice memories for me :).

The most attractive back designs are from 1954, especially the $5 and $10.  Only the $50 and $1 are the butt-ugliest of all time.

The only reason the 1954 $1 is not THE ugliest is because the colour is more appealing than the $50...but the back of the $1 is even more BORING than the $50 - clouds, an isolated wheat field and some telephone poles - how exciting (<yawn>).

Overall I'd say the most impressive and best-designed series (both the fronts and backs) are all of those from 1935 and 1937...maybe old-fashioned today, but at least the money LOOKED like money.

venga50
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
« Reply #8 on: December 24, 2004, 04:49:03 pm »

translate "Borden looks thingy-eyed" into "Borden looks c0ck-eyed"...guess posts are automatically censored and "dirty" :o words are replaced with the word "thingy"!

Seth
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 936
« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2004, 06:40:05 pm »

My least fave:  1991 $20.   Boooooring, and that shade of green they use for the background tint... it looks like someone lost their lunch on the note and then wiped it with a cloth.  Yuck.

As for fmy favourites, chalk up another for the multicoloured $10 and $50.  My two personal faves.

Track your Canadian currency online!

http://www.whereswilly.com
Collector-in-BC
  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2004, 07:33:25 pm »

I'd have to say that with it's red color and scene of the RCMP Musical Ride, the 1975 $50 is the most beautiful note.

As for the most ugliest, it's a toss up between the 1979 and 1991 $20s. I just don't like their olive green color.

Wanted: Unc 1954 Beattie-Rasminsky *B/D $10
Kinghaku
  • Guest
« Reply #11 on: December 26, 2004, 12:42:06 am »

I guess in a way appeal goes hand in hand with how often we see the note.  We see 20$ bird notes everyday of our lives, maybe thats why we see them as borring. Perhaps in 20-30 years when that's not as common we will have a new found appreciation for them lil' bastards...

Haku
Marc
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 633
« Reply #12 on: December 26, 2004, 03:25:41 am »

Nicest notes, I would say a Devil 1954 $5 note, such a vibrant blue.  And the 1972 $5's as well.

Ugliest, the 1979 $20.

Marc :)
Jason
  • Guest
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2004, 09:58:58 am »

Nicest: The multicoloured series, particularly the $50.

Ugliest: The Birds series.
Hudson A B
  • Very Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,501
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2004, 08:55:21 pm »

...
« Last Edit: July 20, 2008, 01:59:53 am by Hudson A B »

CPMS Lifetime Member #1502.
 

Login with username, password and session length