@alaura22 said:
Alex,
I thought robec and I nailed it!
"66 with possible Cameo designation"
BUT
As you showed us, one of the pics got the CAM designation and one didn't. So how is one to know what they will or won't do on any given day? Too much inconsistency if you ask me.
Congrats on the coin
I agree with Mark on this one - gotta commit to the CAM if you want it right.
There's a lot of inconsistency - and that's what I wanted to highlight for this post. Not my coin.
.
.
One comment that I've seen pop up a few times is that the series of 36-42 CAMs is graded more leniently than other years. I can attest that this may be the case for a few coins, but overall it's not true. Most 36-42 CAMs get more scrutiny, and are therefore graded more harshly than other series. The coin generally has to be all there, whereas with other series - like Barber Proofs for example - a liner coin can get the designation quite often.
The service the coin is graded at also matters quite a bit. PCGS tends to be looser than NGC on these.
@alaura22 said:
Alex,
I thought robec and I nailed it!
"66 with possible Cameo designation"
BUT
As you showed us, one of the pics got the CAM designation and one didn't. So how is one to know what they will or won't do on any given day? Too much inconsistency if you ask me.
Congrats on the coin
I agree with Mark on this one - gotta commit to the CAM if you want it right.
There's a lot of inconsistency - and that's what I wanted to highlight for this post. Not my coin.
.
.
One comment that I've seen pop up a few times is that the series of 36-42 CAMs is graded more leniently than other years. I can attest that this may be the case for a few coins, but overall it's not true. Most 36-42 CAMs get more scrutiny, and are therefore graded more harshly than other series. The coin generally has to be all there, whereas with other series - like Barber Proofs for example - a liner coin can get the designation quite often.
The service the coin is graded at also matters quite a bit. PCGS tends to be looser than NGC on these.
Numerically more earlier proofs may slip over the CAM line, but that is because there are a lot more of them that are CAM's. As a percentage of the coins that are CAM, i dont agree.
Going strictly by the coins I have actually seen in person, I would say I agree with the TPG's >90% of the time on earlier proofs in the areas i collect (shield nickels, barbers, morgans) that are graded CAM, where I would disagree with the TPG's 100% of the time on Buffalo's and Walkers graded CAM.
Comments
I agree with Mark on this one - gotta commit to the CAM if you want it right.
There's a lot of inconsistency - and that's what I wanted to highlight for this post. Not my coin.
.
.
One comment that I've seen pop up a few times is that the series of 36-42 CAMs is graded more leniently than other years. I can attest that this may be the case for a few coins, but overall it's not true. Most 36-42 CAMs get more scrutiny, and are therefore graded more harshly than other series. The coin generally has to be all there, whereas with other series - like Barber Proofs for example - a liner coin can get the designation quite often.
The service the coin is graded at also matters quite a bit. PCGS tends to be looser than NGC on these.
Coin Photographer.
Numerically more earlier proofs may slip over the CAM line, but that is because there are a lot more of them that are CAM's. As a percentage of the coins that are CAM, i dont agree.
Going strictly by the coins I have actually seen in person, I would say I agree with the TPG's >90% of the time on earlier proofs in the areas i collect (shield nickels, barbers, morgans) that are graded CAM, where I would disagree with the TPG's 100% of the time on Buffalo's and Walkers graded CAM.
I will admit I thought of sanction with all of his near misses when I saw the grade reveal
It’s a nice half And has lost of frost. In that picture the sun looks real real iffy to me
Nice score if you were the submitter
Martin