Home U.S. Coin Forum

How is this not a DCAM

Comments

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,839 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Lacks full frost

  • GoldbullyGoldbully Posts: 16,853 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice coin.....LDCAM

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,020 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 11,710 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

  • 1madman1madman Posts: 1,288 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You should have let pcgs restore it. Might take several regrade attempts to get DCAM again. Tuition I suppose

  • FlyingAlFlyingAl Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

    Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.

  • TomBTomB Posts: 20,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • 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

  • ShaunBC5ShaunBC5 Posts: 1,631 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 30, 2022 11:43PM

    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.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @teb5959 ... Welcome aboard. I would have sent it in for conservation rather than doing it myself. Cheers, RickO

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @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.

  • johnny9434johnny9434 Posts: 27,489 ✭✭✭✭✭

    it adds petigree to it. omg, they dont know who we are? :'(

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,020 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2022 10:04AM

    @Maywood said:
    @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.

    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.

  • JimnightJimnight Posts: 10,810 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To me it does not have that deep frost look at first glance, but then I'm looking at a photo.

  • GoldbullyGoldbully Posts: 16,853 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    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


  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,839 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2022 10:21AM

    @MFeld said:
    Why would you think the coin merited a DCAM designation?

    Ownership adds frost.> @Maywood said:

    @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.

    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.

  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,474 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,884 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2022 10:30AM

    @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??


  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,839 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DeplorableDan said:

    @Maywood said:
    @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.

    It's also possible that some or none of the pictures are representative of the coins in hand.

  • divecchiadivecchia Posts: 6,527 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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

    Hobbyist & Collector (not an investor).
    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)
  • DeplorableDanDeplorableDan Posts: 2,532 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2022 10:45AM

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @DeplorableDan said:

    @Maywood said:
    @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.

    It's also possible that some or none of the pictures are representative of the coins in hand.

    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.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 12,020 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @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 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.

  • CameonutCameonut Posts: 7,256 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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!

  • OldIndianNutKaseOldIndianNutKase Posts: 2,700 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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??

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,839 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @OldIndianNutKase said:
    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".

  • gumby1234gumby1234 Posts: 5,425 ✭✭✭✭✭

    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

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file