Do either of these nickels warrant a Cameo designation?
SanctionII
Posts: 12,260 ✭✭✭✭✭
Picked them up recently and took better photos of them today.
0
SanctionII
Posts: 12,260 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
@SanctionII ... Based strictly on the pictures, I think neither reverse would garner the CAM... The obverses, perhaps.... Cheers, RickO
I just don’t see enough contrast and frostiness, though the photos may not show it.
Type collector, mainly into Seated. -formerly Ownerofawheatiehorde. Good BST transactions with: mirabela, OKCC, MICHAELDIXON, Gerard
I'll respectively part company with ricko and owner' on this
and say yes. There's good mirror to the coins and I suggest there's
frost on the head and shoulders and buildings on the reverse. Just MHO though.
I think they both miss.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think no cam from those pics.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
The photos do not show cam for me.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Lighting is tricky with proof and contrast. Ie jeffproofs. I think the second one has a chance. The rev on the first one is missing a lot of frost on the right side
Nice coins
Martin
Frosty but not frosty enough for a designation IMHO (especially the reverses)
Those who replied to this thread have grading standards as strict, or even stricter. than PCGS when it comes to giving out a Cameo designation.
After PCGS grades these two nickels I will post the results and Trueviews to this thread.
@SanctionII i hope you get them and looking forward to my cam grading skills😀. If you think they have a good shot that’s says a bunch for the coins. You do have the advantage of them in hand, over us keyboard warriors
Good luck
Martin
Martin.
My cell phone photos are of low quality. IMO both coins warrant the designation.
However my experience with PCGS is that coins I think should Cameo often are not and coins I think are not Cameo sometimes are.
If I do not play the grading game I will never win.
I think there's distinction here to be made between CAM and DCAM, and it's the latter
where expectations seem to lie. I think you can get the CAM designation
for mirror and the smattering of frost on both sides but clearly not a DCAM though.
Again, respectiing the view of others here, this is just mho.
Looking forward to the hearing your results from PCGS.
Please include me in your giveaway!
Would be more than happy to receive the 53!
Lol
Last year I sent in these two proof nickels (1953 and 1957). Both of them have fully frosted devices and deep mirrored fields. Both also have toning. Neither coin received a Cameo designation (even though when you see them under good lighting the contrast between the frosted devices and mirrored fields jumps out at you).
PF68
PF67
The 1953 and 1957 proof nickels posted in this thread are untoned. Even if they do not receive a Cameo designation they will look good next to their toned counterparts.