A couple of low mintage coins added to the stack

mavs2583

Hi all,

Here's my first two pickups of 2022. Both have a mintage of 600

WAYNEAS

OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.
Wayne

Mr_Spud

Very nice 👍🏻

golden

Very nice.

Steven59

Fantastic proof coins! I always liked the looks of a DCAM 3¢ Nickel piece and yours is exceptional.

rooksmith

What are the mintage numbers for each?

joeykoins

Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

airplanenut

@WAYNEAS said:
OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.

I don't want to take away from the coins since they both look very appealing (I especially like the frost on the dime, which seems quite strong), but how can you possibly opine on the grade of a proof from a photo of the full slab? The marks that usually limit the grade on proofs are often hard enough to see in any image, especially for higher-end proofs; a small photo that isn't intentionally lit to show them definitely won't.

Eldorado9

Nice CAM on that Dime! pretty!

mavs2583

@rooksmith said:
What are the mintage numbers for each?

600 for each one.

MFeld

@WAYNEAS said:
OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.
Wayne

The coins look highly attractive but as Proofs, there’s no way to grade them from images.

mavs2583

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

This is a piece I will be holding on for a very long time. I'm building a type set and working on getting an example of each style that I won't feel the need to "Upgrade". I will definitely consider it in the future if/when I do sell. I was pleasantly surprised when I received it. It's at least borderline DCAM.

fcloud

@airplanenut said:

@WAYNEAS said:
OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.

I don't want to take away from the coins since they both look very appealing (I especially like the frost on the dime, which seems quite strong), but how can you possibly opine on the grade of a proof from a photo of the full slab? The marks that usually limit the grade on proofs are often hard enough to see in any image, especially for higher-end proofs; a small photo that isn't intentionally lit to show them definitely won't.

The other side of that anyone who knows photography knows the contrast can be adjusted to change the looks of things.

MFeld

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Calm down, Joey.😉 Based on the images, the reverse of the dime looks DCAM, but a sizeable portion of the obverse portrait appears to fall short.

airplanenut

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Unless the photos are making the mirrors look weaker, I think the obverse fields look a bit too weak to be DCAM, even though the frost certainly looks all there. That said, I love those kinds of coins--just about the next level, but priced way lower because it's just not there. I've got many coins that look just about the next grade or are on the cusp of something that would drive the price way up, and the only reason I can afford them is because they're just not quite there. Almost all the quality at a way lower price.

P0CKETCHANGE

A very nice pair. I’d be proud to own either!

anablep

Great looking proofs. Thanks for sharing!

mavs2583

@MFeld said:

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Calm down, Joey.😉 Based on the images, the reverse of the dime looks DCAM, but a sizeable portion of the obverse portrait appears to fall short.

Unfortunately I do agree with you, that was based on me looking at other DCAMs from the series and seeing what PCGS considers DCAM for this particular series, but I'm far from an expert and it's to me at least debatable. Either way I'm in love with this coin, moves up to my top 5 in my collection.

mavs2583

@airplanenut said:

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Unless the photos are making the mirrors look weaker, I think the obverse fields look a bit too weak to be DCAM, even though the frost certainly looks all there. That said, I love those kinds of coins--just about the next level, but priced way lower because it's just not there. I've got many coins that look just about the next grade or are on the cusp of something that would drive the price way up, and the only reason I can afford them is because they're just not quite there. Almost all the quality at a way lower price.

I had an 1891 PR65+DCAM on my radar but it sold, it was more than double the price of mine. I was able to grab both of these pieces together for less than the dime DCAM would have cost me, so I feel like I got a solid deal. I'm picky with my pickups and have really embraced the "buy the coin not the slab" mantra, which I kind of ignored when I first started buying graded coins.

MFeld

@mavs2583 said:

@MFeld said:

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Calm down, Joey.😉 Based on the images, the reverse of the dime looks DCAM, but a sizeable portion of the obverse portrait appears to fall short.

Unfortunately I do agree with you, that was based on me looking at other DCAMs from the series and seeing what PCGS considers DCAM for this particular series, but I'm far from an expert and it's to me at least debatable. Either way I'm in love with this coin, moves up to my top 5 in my collection.

The coin looks gorgeous and I think it’s great that you feel the way you do about it.

jesbroken

Wow! Great coins, absolutely gorgeous. Congrats and thank you for sharing.
Jim

airplanenut

@mavs2583 said:

@airplanenut said:

@joeykoins said:
Exquisite proof coins, dude.
That Seated also should have received the DCAM. I would send in for the DCAM.
Almost a $4000 price spread in CAM than DCAM.

Unless the photos are making the mirrors look weaker, I think the obverse fields look a bit too weak to be DCAM, even though the frost certainly looks all there. That said, I love those kinds of coins--just about the next level, but priced way lower because it's just not there. I've got many coins that look just about the next grade or are on the cusp of something that would drive the price way up, and the only reason I can afford them is because they're just not quite there. Almost all the quality at a way lower price.

I had an 1891 PR65+DCAM on my radar but it sold, it was more than double the price of mine. I was able to grab both of these pieces together for less than the dime DCAM would have cost me, so I feel like I got a solid deal. I'm picky with my pickups and have really embraced the "buy the coin not the slab" mantra, which I kind of ignored when I first started buying graded coins.

You're going to earn a lot of points with @MFeld if you keep following that mantra.

GaCoinGuy

WAYNEAS

@airplanenut said:

@MFeld said:

@WAYNEAS said:
OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.

No malice meant here but I was not asked to grade them, nor would I try without having them in hand.
Opinions are just that, opinions, as also are yours.
Wayne

david3142

Beautiful proofs! Outstanding eye appeal on both. Please crop the images so that we can see them better. Otherwise, the pic is 95% slab (and background) for these tiny coins.

airplanenut

@WAYNEAS said:

@airplanenut said:

@MFeld said:

@WAYNEAS said:
OMG
They are each extreme standouts.
In my opinion, they are under graded.

No malice meant here but I was not asked to grade them, nor would I try without having them in hand.
Opinions are just that, opinions, as also are yours.

To opine that they're undergraded at 66, you'd have to grade them at least 67, no? That seems difficult to do from an image if you also wouldn't grade them if they're not in hand.

WAYNEAS

Wayne

WAYNEAS

@airplanenut said:

To opine that they're undergraded at 66, you'd have to grade them at least 67, no? That seems difficult to do from an image if you also wouldn't grade them if they're not in hand.

>
No, on the 67-grade presumption.

There are currently 4 coins in the MS66+ grade on the 1869, 3 cent DCAM coin.

On the 1891, .10 cent piece, there are 12 in a MS67 with 2 of those being in a plus grade.

So, they could very well grade at 66+ DCAM or CAM accordingly.

When one takes the time to view the TVs, the pictures are not thru a slab or poor lighting.

When one cannot have the coins in hand, I'll grade by the TVs.

I stand behind my opinion that they are under graded.

Wayne

MFeld

@WAYNEAS said:

@airplanenut said:

To opine that they're undergraded at 66, you'd have to grade them at least 67, no? That seems difficult to do from an image if you also wouldn't grade them if they're not in hand.

>
No, on the 67-grade presumption.

There are currently 4 coins in the MS66+ grade on the 1869, 3 cent DCAM coin.

On the 1891, .10 cent piece, there are 12 in a MS67 with 2 of those being in a plus grade.

So, they could very well grade at 66+ DCAM or CAM accordingly.

When one takes the time to view the TVs, the pictures are not thru a slab or poor lighting.

When one cannot have the coins in hand, I'll grade by the TVs.

I stand behind my opinion that they are under graded.

Wayne

The grades of Proof coins are typically determined largely, if not mostly, by the extent of hairlines. And even the best images rarely show the extent of those hairlines. For example, based upon images, a proof 64 or 65 coin can often appear to be essentially flawless, thus making it indistinguishable from a PR66, 67 or 68.
Grade guesstimates for Proof coins, when based upon images, might be fun, but they’re largely meaningless. And that includes my own guesses, as well.

asheland

Great coins!

WAYNEAS

@MFeld said:

@WAYNEAS said:

@airplanenut said:

To opine that they're undergraded at 66, you'd have to grade them at least 67, no? That seems difficult to do from an image if you also wouldn't grade them if they're not in hand.

>
No, on the 67-grade presumption.

There are currently 4 coins in the MS66+ grade on the 1869, 3 cent DCAM coin.

On the 1891, .10 cent piece, there are 12 in a MS67 with 2 of those being in a plus grade.

So, they could very well grade at 66+ DCAM or CAM accordingly.

When one takes the time to view the TVs, the pictures are not thru a slab or poor lighting.

When one cannot have the coins in hand, I'll grade by the TVs.

I stand behind my opinion that they are under graded.

Wayne

The grades of Proof coins are typically determined largely, if not mostly, by the extent of hairlines. And even the best images rarely show the extent of those hairlines. For example, based upon images, a proof 64 or 65 coin can often appear to be essentially flawless, thus making it indistinguishable from a PR66, 67 or 68.
Grade guesstimates for Proof coins, when based upon images, might be fun, but they’re largely meaningless. And that includes my own guesses, as well.

Nicely put.
Thanks
Wayne

airplanenut

@WAYNEAS said:

@airplanenut said:

To opine that they're undergraded at 66, you'd have to grade them at least 67, no? That seems difficult to do from an image if you also wouldn't grade them if they're not in hand.

>
No, on the 67-grade presumption.

There are currently 4 coins in the MS66+ grade on the 1869, 3 cent DCAM coin.

On the 1891, .10 cent piece, there are 12 in a MS67 with 2 of those being in a plus grade.

So, they could very well grade at 66+ DCAM or CAM accordingly.

When one takes the time to view the TVs, the pictures are not thru a slab or poor lighting.

When one cannot have the coins in hand, I'll grade by the TVs.

I stand behind my opinion that they are under graded.

Wayne

With that logic every coin that isn't the finest known could be undergraded. Whether it's an upgrade from 66 to 67 or 66+, you've still gone from "I was not asked to grade them, nor would I try without having them in hand" to "When one cannot have the coins in hand, I'll grade by the TVs." @MFeld already pointed out how TV's aren't going to be of any significant help, either. Heck, one of the two coins doesn't even have a TV, so "When one takes the time to view the TVs, the pictures are not thru a slab or poor lighting" falls short, too.

WAYNEAS

Wayne

ricko

Those are two beautiful acquisitions. I agree that proofs cannot be properly graded from images... particularly distant slab images. That being said, I would say that based on the assigned grades, you can be very proud of those coins. Cheers, RickO