Let's play guess the cameo, aka who can figure out PCGS's grading?

Russ

Coin #1:



Coin #2:



Both of the above coins were recently listed by R&I. They also came from the same submission and were very recently graded. One received the cameo designation, one did not. Which one is the cameo, which isn't and why?



Russ, NCNE

airplanenut

Top one isi CAM- frost breaks in the bottom shield

MJCoin

Coin #2 seems to have better contrast, but #1 has better fields. I'll say #2 is Cameo because of the better obverse contrast.
Plus #1 is a '65. They would be tougher on #1.

dragon

If the 1965 did not receive a CAM designation, PCGS clearly made an error, the coin is a no question cameo piece IMO. The 1967 is somewhat less cameoed however should have also received the CAM designation IMO.

Dragon

stujoe

Coin 1: Cameo

Coin 2: Not Cameo

Reasoning? It just looks that way to me. :-)

MAULUMALL

I just don't get it.#1 cam #2 got #2 on

Geoman

Just a guess, but I'd say #2 is the CAM. There seems to be a better contrast on the reverse of the '67 between the dark and light fields.

CarlWohlforth

The frost on the cheek of the '67 seems slightly weaker. Also the lettering on the reverse of the '67 seems less frosty than the '65. Neither coin seems to have very deep fields.

So the '65 is cameo and the '67 isn't. Unless this is a trick question...

ClarkOfKent

I'd say the '67 got the CAM, because the pops are lower for the '65, and that would mean you beat the odds... can't have that.

Clark

Whitewashqtr

#2 cameo... but how can anyone "guess" without seeing the coins in person.

ursabear

Russ,

If I had to "guess" from the pictures alone, I'd say that #1 is CAM because the obverse devices are frostier. The reverses seem almost exactly the same on these two.

It's a tough call, really. One of those that's on the line... I just think JFK's bust is more contrasted to the mirrors on #1

Russ

<< <i>but how can anyone "guess" without seeing the coins in person. >>



That's why it's a guess. If you saw the coins in person, you could just look at the label on the holder.

Russ, NCNE

itsnotjustme

The 1965 is not CAM due to the less mirrored fields on the obverse.

nwcs

Photography can be deceptive. My guess is 1965 is cameo. The cheek on the 1967 looks brilliant to me.

mnmcoin

I'll go for the 67, PCGS seems to be on a big deep black mirror kick these days, and the 67 has more of that look.

morris <><

keets

i just love a mystery.

al h.

DHeath

Since it's a guess, here's mine. Coin #1 got the designation, and #2 that shows what looks like dip residue did not. It was stripped of cam designation and hence assured a redip and resubmission. My guess is that it was market graded, and the guarantee protected.

IrishMike

agree with Don either dip or nose residue.

DHeath

Try this one, and see the difference good pictures make.
Fixed link

Mojoe

Coin #1 might be (could be) the cameo. The portrait looks frostier than the #2 coin. I'll go with the '65 as the cameo.

osirisMMII

Gee Russ - the way the blind arrogant basturds have been grading Kennedys lately I surprised either came back with a CAM designation!!

TheNumish

Just got home from the zoo. You see I printed out a copy of the coins and showed them to several monkeys and one was positve it's number two. He did say in sign language if it's not number two it'd be number one.

dan1ecu

My guess is that they gave the 1967 a CAM designation, but not the 1965. Why? Because, If I remember correctly, 1965 SMS Kennedys are difficult to find in cameo; therefore, PCGS would be extra careful in awarding that designation (maybe unreasonably so). That’s my reasoning, anyway.

Dan

osirisMMII

Numish - Are you saying the monkeys have escaped from the PCGS assembly line and found their way outta the CU compound????

TheNumish

No. This is a completely different machination of monkeys. The leader did mention if the PCGS grader who didn't cameo both coins showed up at the Dallas Zoo he'd throw feces at him. And PCGS thinks were a tough crowd!!

nwcs

But can the monkeys detect artificial toning?

ClarkOfKent

Yo! Russ!

I like a little suspense as much as the next guy, but c'mon!!! Inquiring minds want to know!

Clark

Rampage

Number 1 is cameo, number 2 is NOT cameo. To me, it seems like the frost on the lettering on the reverse of the 67, and even the obverse is not as thick as that of the 65.

Of course, this is my best guess since I cannot see the coins in person.

DCAMFranklin

Very poor quality photos, so it difficult to be accurate as to why one coin didn't receive the Cameo grade. The outside lettering on the reverse of the '65 from 1:00 to 4:00 don't appear well frosted. The '65 is not Cameo. The profile of the '67 is much frostier. The '67 is the Cameo.

With so many complaining about the inconsistency of the Cameo grade at PCGS, I wonder why it is you subject your coins to their grade?? Consistency is the ultimate determinant for a quality grading company. Vote with your dollars and your feet. Take your coins elsewhere until PCGS becomes consistent with their grading practices.

ClarkOfKent

That's right! Those are very poor quality photos. How do you expect us to be accurate with such crappy photos?

And, quit your incessant whining! Why do you even bother submitting coins? And, why oh why have you wasted the precious time of those of us who are so much better than you by posting such trivial, poorly photographed trash on this forum? Surely, you don't think anyone would enjoy guessing which is CAM just for the fun of it? Stop having fun, DAMMIT! All of you! Stop it NOW!

Geezsk! Russ, will you never learn?

Clark

Russ

<< <i>#2 that shows what looks like dip residue >>



Don,

You have an excellent eye. The 1967 did, indeed, have dip residue on it. Note the use of the past tense.

Russ, NCNE

ClarkOfKent

C'mon, don't make me beg. Which one's which?

Clark

LucyBop

<< <i>Very poor quality photos >>


One look at DCAMSF's ebay auctions and you will see quality photos, he doesn't want to brag, but his are ten times better then everyone elses......

Russ

Clark,

The experiment has not yet concluded. The answer will be revealed in the fullness of time.

Russ, NCNE

ClarkOfKent

Russ,

So, we're all just part of your little "experiment", huh? I feel so used.

Clark

p.s.
Got a pic of the '67 post-residue?

LucyBop

<< <i>The answer will be revealed in the fullness of time >>


ah...Phooey!

MAULUMALL

And I thought Lucy was a tease

keets

hey russ

have you declared a winner yet??

al h.

ClarkOfKent

He's just not tellin'....

Bear

I think old Russ is going to reveal his monster secret

on Clanks schoolroom Tales. What a coup for the story line.

My opinion on the coins, is that both are Kennedy Half Dollars.

I defy anyone to challange my official pronouncement. All knowing Bear

ClarkOfKent

Actually, those are pretty good photos, Russ. Almost good enough to hide these distinguishing marks!

Hehehehehehe
Buwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!



Clark

keets

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

al h.

Russ

<< <i>Almost good enough to hide these distinguishing marks! >>



That's strange. Those marks seem to no longer be on the coins.

Russ, NCNE

keets

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"hello. my name is Russ and i'm a dip-a-holic!!!!!!!!!!!! Buwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!"

al h.

oldcameoproofsguy

OK Russ,

I'm going with the same logic as dan1ecu, the 1967 is a CAM because chances are the 1965 was struck on a planchet that wasn't prepared as well as the 1967.

ClarkOfKent

We now return you to your normal thread.

Bear

Russ dips everything, he even dipped his dog.............twice.

keets

c'mon russ, take the shroud off the mystery.

al h.

Whitewashqtr

Russ aint telling cause even he doesnt know.

BigToe

Great job, I have coins graded on a weekly bases. I am interested in CA & DCAM. I think coin collectors are going crazey trying to figure out PCGS and NGC. Look at both dates you can tell the difference in cameo contrast also the rev. the shield and letters have less cameo. The 1965 is the winner

LucyBop

Who told you to stick your 'BIGTOE' in this?????? Sorry, I couldn't help it, been drinking Margaritas again.