1936 PR66CAMs - MINE WAS DNC'd (update)

DMWJR

Here are photos of the only three certified 1936 Lincoln Proof Cameos. Mine was the second graded by NGC and is currently at PCGS for cross. I have also attached scans of the first NGC cameo, and the only PCGS cameo to date.

ENJOY!

dbldie55

While I know scans can be misleading, the coin you have in for crossover certainly looks the most "cameo". I wish you luck on.

Did DHRC sell the PCGS coin? If not, your coin could "hurt" it's value (perhaps considerably).

oldcameoproofsguy

Those are some great proof Lincolns!

I am going to eventually have to make a concerted effort to purchase some 1936 to 1942 CAMs. It seems like they're really tough in all denominations.

DMWJR

I should have named this thread the PHOTO SHOWDOWN. It's the next best thing to lining them up in person and comparing them to see which one is best. Maybe this could be a new way to compare top coins????

I know my scan is better, but . . . here are some things to look at:

1. The first NGC coin has serious haze/film on the obverse and reverse, along with discoloration on the reverse, most notably on the right wheat ear. The cameo is very light as well, and has a milky film look to it.

2. The PCGS coin has haze in front of the chest and chin, discoloration on the hair, and some spotting on the reverse.

3. My coin is (in my NOT so humble opinion) a high end 66 which has NO haze or discoloration, and solid cameo on the devices.

Do you see how the cameo on the First NGC is filmy? No so on the PCGS coin or mine. There is a cameo texture there which sets it apart. Likewise, the cameo effect must be full across the bust, and not just on the lapel and back of the jacket.

If I am missing something here, please point me in the right direction.

Stewart Blay helped me distinguish the difference between the milky film and true cameo, and I appreciate what he took time to share with me. I appreciate my cameos more with the education.

DMWJR

dd55, to my best knowledge, Hall still has the PCGS coin. I don't want to hurt it, I want to HURDLE it!!!

merz2

Doug
You already know how I feel.As for the rest of you,I'll say it publicly here.The coin in for crossover is the better coin from all that I've seen.While I've not held it in my hand,the scans and pics spesk for themselves.I've wished Doug luck.If that coin doesn't cross,David Hall needs to review that one.IMHO

Russ

Doug,

To my eye, (note; Lincolns aren't my thing), I agree with the others that yours looks the best. I think the results of the crossover will speak volumes about the "new" PCGS. Please keep us posted.

Russ, NCNE

CarlWohlforth

Those are three nice proofs! I like the 2'nd image best too.

IrishMike

Doug, if you make it to FUN, I'd love to see the coin, I collect proof 36-42 lincolns and have never seen a cameo in person.

banknote1

Nice coin! I have never seen a cameo 1936 cent!? I have one dumb question? Why crossover the coin??
Does a PCGS cameo sell for more than a NGC!

DMWJR

To my knowledge, the PCGS 36 has never legitimately sold after it was bought by David Hall. It showed up on Teletrade and got up over $15K, but apparently didn't meet the minimum. It resided on Hall's site at $22K for about a month and I think he pulled it and put it in his collection.

The First NGC coin sold for approximately $8,500 at Long Beach a few months ago -- even with all of that haze and discoloration.

I don't really want to say what I paid for mine, but it is somewhere in between.

The reason for cross is that (a) I want the copper color gurrantee that NGC does not offer, (b) I want to put it in my registry set, and (c) based on market price data in general, this coin would sell for substantially more in a PCGS holder if I desired to sell it.

If it doesn't cross, I will take it to FUN and make one last in person attempt. If it still doesn't cross, it will go to the bank safety deposit box with my other PCGS AND NGC holdered coins, because I absolutely love it. It is the real capper of the series for me, and would be the last one I would sell.

IrishMike: I will be at the FUN show. I have already booked my flight to arrive on the 8th through the weekend. See ya there!

shylock

Pretty cool having all 3 examples Doug, and yours is a beauty. I archive IH photos for the same reason -- it's as close as we'll get to having all the coins sitting on our desk for comparison. Ideally they would be imaged in the same format since jpegs come in the same range of quality as coins (especially jpegs of copper proofs!). As imaging technology improves so will the consistency, and sources for archived images will allow collectors to really see how their coins stand up against the population. Maybe even Stewart's Lincolns will be shared online someday...

TomB

Wow! They're all pretty, but that second coin is a smoker!

goose3

I have got to agree with TomB!
nice nice lincoln!!!!!

kranky

Those are all beauties, but the second one does seem to have a nicer cameo and overall nicer color. A fantastic-looking coin.

oreville

At first glance it looks like the middle coin is the only true cameo of the three. However, the lighting is different on all three which makes it harder to compare.

In any event, DMWJR, you have a lovely coin there and looks to be a 67 cameo.

DHeath

Truly a beautiful coin, and I'm very curious how it will be graded. Obviously, there are limited comparison pieces. Perhaps yours will be the benchmark.

TAP444

If that one does not cross then PCGS has a serious problem
I guess we will see how the new guy (Ron Howard) is.
I hope politics have no effect here.I wish you the best of luck
Tim

DMWJR

Well, things may not have changed at PCGS. I just got the results -- "Did not cross"

I will be taking it to the FUN show to resubmit live in person.

MAULUMALL

Here's how we avoid the possibility of conflict of interest.

WE NEVER SUBMITT COINS THAT WE OWN TO PCGS FOR GRADING. WE ARE NEVER OUR OWN CUSTOMER.

But from what I read here you sure are a collector.

DCAMFranklin

Like I said in one of WonderCoin's threads, let's not get all giddy just yet. Let's wait 6 months before evaluating whether meaningful, worthwhile change has occured at either organization. So far all we have heard is verbal fluff!