It is interesting. The techniques for creating dies has changed a lot over the millennia -- all the way from hand-engraving (then) to laser-engraving (now).
I'm biased because I specialize in 18th/19th century US stuff, but I think those were the best-looking (overall - not necessarily just the designs themselves).
Dies were made by starting with an actual-sized engraved positive which was used to make the working dies (negatives), which were then polished to make the coins (positives). You get cool errors and varieties from slight differences in dies (that crack and break over time) and things like hand-punched dates (why re-engrave a whole new master when you can just take the main design with a blank date, create a die, and smack in the "1895" with a hammer? :)
I think the modern modern laser-engraved stuff has lost something...the coins of today are almost "too good" - they're kinda flat-looking & soft. shrug
I'm biased because I specialize in 18th/19th century US stuff, but I think those were the best-looking (overall - not necessarily just the designs themselves).
Dies were made by starting with an actual-sized engraved positive which was used to make the working dies (negatives), which were then polished to make the coins (positives). You get cool errors and varieties from slight differences in dies (that crack and break over time) and things like hand-punched dates (why re-engrave a whole new master when you can just take the main design with a blank date, create a die, and smack in the "1895" with a hammer? :)
I think the modern modern laser-engraved stuff has lost something...the coins of today are almost "too good" - they're kinda flat-looking & soft. shrug