Proof Liberty Nickel: How close to cameo?

dan1ecu

Does anyone think that this coin could be designated as a cameo?

1884 5C Obverse

1884 5C Reverse

I’ve heard that the grading services didn’t always give the cameo designation. Maybe if resubmitted, this coin could get one?

Dan

FC57Coins

The picture is too small to really tell Dan. Some parts of the devices look cameo - but it's hard to tell on the entire coin. It's a nice piece no doubt about it, but I would need to see more closely to be able to give a further opinion.

Frank

littlewicher

It's a great coin. The reverse lettering would probably keep it from a CAM designation, though.

CarlWohlforth

I can't tell how old that NGC holder is. You might send it in if that holder is older than when NGC started giving out Cameo on these coins. Otherwise I wouldn't bother. Your V has no frost, but I have seen Cameo V nickels with little to no frost on the V. The hair and wreath look very nice.

DCAMFranklin

Dan-
The coin probably wouldn't make Cameo, though it is a very attractive coin. If any 3rd party grading service is going to give the marginal coin a Cameo designation, it is definitely NGC. Good luck!

Dog97

I have a 97 model in the same slab & grade and my pict looks just like yours. However in real life the Cam is complete although the pict shows it weak on the face & V just like yours. My pict is a Heritage pict just like yours is so if yours does look better firsthand I would send it in under the Regrade Service. Unlike PCGS, NGC might have some kind of designation review thats cheaper than the regrade service. I wouldn't crack it or try to cross it to PCGS though.

Conder101

NGC started using that slab in July of 2001. If it would make CAM it would probably already be marked as such.

Elcontador

Agree w the poster that said the coin wouldn't get the CAM designation due to the reverse.

Before resubmitting a coin like this for a CAM designation, ask if it would make the coin more valuable. Many of the late 19th century proof coins are CAM in any event (late Seated dates and many of the Barber proof coins), so putting the CAM designation on their holders only generates more submission fees for PCGS and NGC. No one in the know would actually pay more $ for them in the 'CAM' designted holder.

Re the Nickel, however, it may depend on the date. Proof Liberty Nickels from I think 1901 through '08 were brilliant, not mirrored, so a CAM designation on proof Nickels of these dates I would be rare -- and would increase their value. Look at other proof Liberty Nickels from other than 1901-08 dates & then make your decision. If you see many of them that seem to have that CAM look but aren't in holders designated as such, I wouldn't resubmit this one. In any event, it's a nice looking coin.

dan1ecu

I appreciate all of the comments. This coin is one of my favorites. I’ll leave it where it is.

Thanks,

Dan

coinguy1

Dan,

I agree with DCAMFranklin that the coin probably wont get the cameo designation.

However, I disagree with his comment

<< <i> If any 3rd party grading service is going to give the marginal coin a Cameo designation, it is definitely NGC. Good luck! >>

My experience has been that NGC is noticeably tighter than PCGS on the Cameo and ultra/deep cameo designations.

As Dog97 made reference to, NGC does allow you to resubmit under "designation review" (for a cost of $10), as opposed to having to pay the full price of a resubmission like PCGS charges.

Edited - "My experience" is in reference to pre-1950 proof coinage.