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 >>
Coin 2 is the cameo frosty and nice mirror fields coin 1 seems dull but then again it could just be the photo
I'll be drinking early Today
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
I have to get in on this for experience. The 67 is the cameo. All external variables considered equal (LIGHTING/CAMERA ANGLE). The reverse of both coins are very equal in contrast. The obverse of the 65 is lighter in contrast than the 67, suggesting the fields are not up to grade
Too funny. I'm glad I was so wishy-washy in the first thread. Now, how bout a new pic of the 65. On a guess the grade resubmission, do you get a fresh holder.....ROFLMAO
Developing theory is what we are meant to do as academic researchers and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>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. >>
Helluva good idea DCAMF! Their grading inconsistancy is the reason I pulled both of my Kennedy proofs sets out of the registry - the grading is a joke right now but I sure ain't laughing! Quality grading company and consistancy in the same sentence? Excuse me while I *gag*.............. The idiots (was gonna say jackasses but didn't want to offend any of the MTV crowd!) grading right now have gone beyond inconsistancy especially in the CAM/DCAM designations and they won't be grading any of my Kennedys until they figure out what they are doing!!
IMHO,the 2nd coin is the Cameo.The contrast between the field and profile is better.That is what I look for.I haven't read the replies to this thread.I'll read them after I reply.
why don't you try to make a few changes in your approach to participation here. it's clear that what you have going on now isn't working. perhaps if you try to be a bit more conciliatory in your responses and work towards being more open as opposed to secretive you would be received with a different attitude. it's not an impossible task. try opening your PM function and using that avenue to ask questions that may avoid leaving yourself open to ridicule within a thread.
i see you at the breaking point right now. members are just waiting for you to enter a thread so they can take a shot at you. take a breather and ask someone for some advice before you come back and take the approach that its4real did where he tried for a fresh start. what do you have to lose??
Russ, Maybe I missed it, but how about the answer explained as to which one is the cameo, which isn't and why? I don't have the time to research everyone's offerings and come to a conclusion. I thought you might have put forth an honest question based upon the pictures and how one perceives and sees them? I'm just calling, not raising the bid. Boston Bob
Comments
<< <i>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 >>
Coin 2 is the cameo frosty and nice mirror fields coin 1 seems dull but then again it could just be the photo
I'll be drinking early Today
"The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD GOD Almighty."
The 67 is the cameo.
All external variables considered equal (LIGHTING/CAMERA ANGLE). The reverse of both coins are very equal in contrast.
The obverse of the 65 is lighter in contrast than the 67, suggesting the fields are not up to grade
The Lincoln cent store:
http://www.lincolncent.com
My numismatic art work:
http://www.cdaughtrey.com
USAF veteran, 1986-1996 :: support our troops - the American way.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>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. >>
Helluva good idea DCAMF! Their grading inconsistancy is the reason I pulled both of my Kennedy proofs sets out of the registry - the grading is a joke right now but I sure ain't laughing! Quality grading company and consistancy in the same sentence? Excuse me while I *gag*.............. The idiots (was gonna say jackasses but didn't want to offend any of the MTV crowd!) grading right now have gone beyond inconsistancy especially in the CAM/DCAM designations and they won't be grading any of my Kennedys until they figure out what they are doing!!
Bear, that's impossible!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Sure, you can dispute the cam designations, but what's obvious is obvious and undisputable.
Clark
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
1967
<< <i>Here is your answer:
1967 >>
DCAMTroll,
You get stupider by the minute. Cretin. Now, let's show everybody just how brainless you are. Ready, dipsh!t? Here it comes.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1383301180
Do you really want to keep embarassing yourself, loser?
Russ, NCNE
why don't you try to make a few changes in your approach to participation here. it's clear that what you have going on now isn't working. perhaps if you try to be a bit more conciliatory in your responses and work towards being more open as opposed to secretive you would be received with a different attitude. it's not an impossible task. try opening your PM function and using that avenue to ask questions that may avoid leaving yourself open to ridicule within a thread.
i see you at the breaking point right now. members are just waiting for you to enter a thread so they can take a shot at you. take a breather and ask someone for some advice before you come back and take the approach that its4real did where he tried for a fresh start. what do you have to lose??
al h.
I think it is highly unlikely that DCAM would receive your message in the spirit it was delivered, but one never knows...
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Maybe I missed it, but how about the answer explained as to which one is the cameo, which isn't and why?
I don't have the time to research everyone's offerings and come to a conclusion. I thought you might have
put forth an honest question based upon the pictures and how one perceives and sees them?
I'm just calling, not raising the bid.
Boston Bob
Actually, I forgot about this thread. As my link indicates, the '67 was designated CAM. The '65 was not.
Russ, NCNE
I was busting on the why, not the year. Thanks for noting the post anyway.
Someone out there uses "inquiring minds want to know"
Boston Bob