Sub-60 CAM/DCAM proof coins

dunkleosteus430

(Just a note: I thought I posted this thread, but I couldn't find it, so I don't think I did. If I did and it got taken down for some reason, sorry for posting it again.)

Like many of y'all, I think circulated proof coins are fascinating. They always make you wonder how they got into circulation, how many 'culls' or 'regular' circulated coins are actually proofs, or how the TPGs recognized them as proofs when they graded them (if they're not a proof only date/mintmark and they're worn to the point where there are no mirror fields. I know there are diagnostics, but I don't know them for any coins and wonder how many people do.)
Anyways, among the impaired proofs are the ones that get a CAM/DCAM/UCAM designation. I looked through all the type coins, commemoratives, bullion, patterns, and even territorial issues, colonials, and miscellaneous stuff on PCGS CoinFacts, and I only found a handful of these sub-60 proofs that had Cameo or Deep Cameo designations. It took about half an hour to scour CoinFacts, and I had all of the qualifying coins noted, but I lost that list and didn't want to look for them again. However, I'm pretty sure I remembered all of them:

Regular:
1979-S Jefferson 5C PR-58 DCAM
1890 Seated 25C PR-58 CAM
2020-S Kennedy 50C, PR-58 DCAM
1980-S SBA $1 PR-58 CAM

Commemoratives:
1983-S Olympics $1, PR-55 DCAM
1986-S Statue of Liberty $1, PR-45 DCAM

Here's the winner:
1986-S Statue of Liberty $1, PR-40 DCAM

Bullion:
(4) 2010-W ASE $1, PR-50 DCAM
1993-P AGE $5, PR-58+ DCAM

These are all I could find. Before today, I didn't even know if PCGS or any other TPG ever designated sub-60 coins as CAM or DCAM, and I doubt many do. If you own any or have pictures of any, please feel free to post them, because I couldn't find any pics! Another thing that would be cool to see is a sub-60 reverse proof coin, but I don't know if those exist...
Comments welcome.

WaterSport

Guilty as charge for throwing proof coinage in to circulation.

WS

Rampage

I, too, have tossed many proofs into circulation. I assume most keep circulating with a few being pulled from time to time.

ricko

I have not put any proof coins in circulation, however, I have found a couple over the years. No CAM or DCAM though. Never thought of sub-60 coins with those designations. Thanks for the research. Cheers, RickO

lilolme

It would outwardly appear that the definition of some of the above grades and DCAM (or CAM) would not go together. That is a DCAM is highly frosted on all of the devices. An XF coin will have not only the frost but most of the luster removed /worn from the coin. I kind of suspect there might be a mechanical error or data listed in the wrong category for some of these. My guess.

FlyingAl

The mint would frequently put proofs into circulation in the 19th and 20th centuries if they did not meet standards (MPLs) and after assay commission tests. Whatever was left over was either melted or released into standard bags of coins. Today, collectors account for the larger amount of proofs in circulation, though collectors did infrequently spend proofs in the earlier decades, either on purpose or by accident (heirs not knowing what a proof was).

As to proofs that are not proof only dates worn down to nothing and being identified as a proof, I have yet to see one. I have seen proofs in holders down to 45 that remain distinctly proof in their characteristics.

As to the CAM and DCAM designations, if the coin has the surface, the TPG will assign the designation. I'm not surprised every example listed above is a modern coin though.

dunkleosteus430

I do suspect that the PR-40 DCAM dollar is just a fluke in CoinFacts. It just doesn't make too much sense.

@FlyingAl said:
As to proofs that are not proof only dates worn down to nothing and being identified as a proof, I have yet to see one. I have seen proofs in holders down to 45 that remain distinctly proof in their characteristics.

What do you mean by 'Distinctly proof'? Sharp details and/or nice fields? Or just identified by a TPG as a proof? Sorry, I'm just wondering what you're referring to.

FlyingAl

@dunkleosteus430 said:
I do suspect that the PR-40 DCAM dollar is just a fluke in CoinFacts. It just doesn't make too much sense.

@FlyingAl said:
As to proofs that are not proof only dates worn down to nothing and being identified as a proof, I have yet to see one. I have seen proofs in holders down to 45 that remain distinctly proof in their characteristics.

What do you mean by 'Distinctly proof'? Sharp details and/or nice fields? Or just identified by a TPG as a proof? Sorry, I'm just wondering what you're referring to.

Here is an example of a PR40 that appears distinctly proof to my eyes. Note the sharp definition of the rim and dentils, all the way around the coin. You will also notice a complete rim, and it is flat all the way around. I discovered a PR30 today that has these characteristics, and looks distinctly proof to me, but since they weren't as defined as on this PR40, I thought I'd post this one.

dunkleosteus430

Thanks. Comparing that to some XF-40 Morgans, I can see the difference, but I'll need more practice to recognize proofs on-sight.

lilolme

Ah, a proof 40 and almost a DCAM.