How is this not a DCAM
teb5959
Posts: 6 ✭
2
teb5959
Posts: 6 ✭
teb5959
Posts: 6 ✭
Comments
Obverse (Washington himself) not enough contrast cameo to make it
Lacks full frost
Nice coin.....LDCAM
Why would you think the coin merited a DCAM designation?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Ownership adds frost.
Obverse frost is not of DCAM quality.
Just some inside information, this coin was cracked out of a PCGS DCAM holder and was resubmitted because of a haze on the surface. quick dip, haze gone. Technical grade remained the same but not the DCAM. I've been collecting
these coins for over 35 years, I have numerous PCGS DCAM coins with lesser degree of frost than this one.
You should have let pcgs restore it. Might take several regrade attempts to get DCAM again. Tuition I suppose
PCGS has tightened their standards. I've never seen them tighter on CAMs and DCAMs.
I do agree that this coin appears to be CAM at best.
Coin Photographer.
Perhaps the haze on the surface contributed to the initial DCAM designation and the removal of the haze via dip reduced the contrast of the coin.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I think graders see too many of these new proof coins with no degree of difference between them. As noted in Rick Tomaska's book Proof coinage there are varying degrees of deep cameo on coins minted from 1950 to 1970. These graders today only have to decide weather its a 69 or 70, all proof coins are deep cameo. Standards don't change only those who interpret what those standards are. I've seen DCAM photo's on pcgs coin value pages with frost break. No dcam coin should have frost break. I'm not playing the crack out game, only pcgs profits from that. I just wanted what the coin was graded before. Wasn't looking for a higher grade, just what 2 graders and a master grader thought the coin graded before.
The haze on the coin was the light blue haze that came from residing in a non inert holder, if anything the removal enhanced the fields to the deep mirror on the true view photo.
Bama two bit collection 1936 -1964
If you just wanted what it was graded before, why did you take the chance dipping it yourself? I’ve never submitted, conserved or cracked out so maybe there was a big reason I don’t know about.
Edit - also, if you put that one picture up as a gtg, I would have guessed CAM but not been surprised by a DCAM designation.
@teb5959 ... Welcome aboard. I would have sent it in for conservation rather than doing it myself. Cheers, RickO
@MFeld said: Why would you think the coin merited a DCAM designation?
Because both sides have thick, even frost with no clear frost breaks, the fields are deep with no hazing and according to the OP it was previously graded as a "DCAM" by PCGS.
I would add that if any of several members who regularly post about modern proof submissions had complained about this coin that the answers given would be radically different. It's a strange phenomenon I call NewGuySyndrome.
it adds petigree to it. omg, they dont know who we are?
Regardless of how the coin was once graded, the obverse frost doesn’t look close to DCAM-worthy to me. And I’d say the same, no matter who posted the coin.
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1957-25c-dcam/95989
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
To me it does not have that deep frost look at first glance, but then I'm looking at a photo.
Ownership adds frost.> @Maywood said:
I've been here for years. I get criticism all the time.
The OP asked a question. We answered it honestly. And now you are seeking to dismiss our opinions because it didn't agree with yours. You aren't even the OP.
I would call the reverse DCAM in the OP, but the obverse falls short. I think you might have gotten a CAM, but it’s been my experience that the CAM designation is inconsistently awarded.
@MFeld, interestingly the link you gave has as the plate coin an example with quite a bold obverse but a reverse that isn't nearly as strongly frosted as the OP coin in my opinion. To me, that just means that the graders are overly objective in their assessment(s) and since others are of the opinion that the grading is currently "tight" then there really isn't a solid answer to what the truth is.
Why is one a DCAM and the other a CAM??
I don’t collect moderns but it’s my opinion that (based on those images) neither of those coins should qualify. If you were to take the obverse of coin 1 and the reverse of coin 2, that’s what I think a DCAM represents.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
It's also possible that some or none of the pictures are representative of the coins in hand.
Looking at the photos only, I agree with @DeplorableDan , but photography is a tricky thing. Only by having the coin in hand would we be able to truly determine if the coin merits the DCAM or not.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
Very true. Also I would imagine the at the obverse may be weighted higher with strike designations, as it is with grading. A strong obverse dcam with a weak frost reverse is probably more likely to get the designation than the opposite. Feel free to correct me if this is not the case, this is merely an assumption on my part.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I noticed that about the reverse, but generally, the obverses of coins are weighted more heavily than reverses.😉
For every person who claims grading is “tight”, there’s probably another who says it’s “loose”. I don’t think that grading tends to fluctuate between tight and loose over time, as much as It’s simply not as consistent on a daily basis as most people desire. Think about how many coins are graded each week - even if the grade is “correct” 90% or more of the time, that’s still thousands of coins each week that are “incorrect”.
What does “overly objective” mean?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I also believe that the OP coin is not frosted enough on the obverse for a dcam designation.
Here is my '57 in 67 dcam.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
I think there to be significant variation in TrueView images. Grading is done in hand and not off photographic images. But with modern coins is DCAM not really boring??
Yes, but 1957 isn't "modern".
DCAM from 1980 forward is boring as almost every proof is a 68 to 70 DCAM
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM