Welcome Bruce Scher to proof Barber quarters!
oldcameoproofsguy
Posts: 3,174 ✭
I'm not alone any more! There is finally someone else actively collecting proof Barber quarters. Welcome Bruce Scher! It is good to have someone else stimulating the series and setting some fire underneath it.
The interest in the series is good; the drawback is that the 12 coins I need to complete the series will be just a little harder to obtain. I'm just glad that someone else likes these things besides me.
The interest in the series is good; the drawback is that the 12 coins I need to complete the series will be just a little harder to obtain. I'm just glad that someone else likes these things besides me.
0
Comments
Bruce Scher
Glenn
That is one beautiful coin!
for me the deep/ultra cameo proofs 1900 to 1915 are super rare to nonexistant
a great thread on a very undervalued coin the barber quarter proofs! and actually quite uncommon just looking at the pops and compairing them to other series with more generous pops and the other seires with higher pops are more strongly priced then the proof barber quarters!!
and windy that is a really great eye appealling deep cameo 1892!!
these coins are long overdue for an explosion in price especially so the deep ultra cameos and they will have their day!
but please guys on the above do not tell anyone!
sincerely michael
bruce scher
That sounds like one really awesome proof set!
I would love to see pictures posted of your set.
You're right, what's there not to love about early CAM proofs?
Like Bruce and Michael have mentioned, the post 1900 CAM/DCAM coins are by far the most difficult. My best one is the 1902 PR67CAM; it is a beautiful coin and should prove to be a really tough CAM date.
One of the real stoppers will be the 1908. I might be wrong, but I believe the only CAM example is a PR67 from the Childs collection. The 1915 may not have any examples graded CAM at all; my coin comes pretty close though.
Took a look at your registry set... nice start!
bruce scher
After 1899 or so, the mint decided to experiment with the long proven techniques, yielding disasterous results. I have looked in a number of sources but have found no descriptions of the change in processes employed in this period. My guess is that the mint decided not to sandblast or pickle the devices at all. One thing is for certain, that the mint produced some very "watery" looking proofs. Finding a true DCAM is rare for post 1900 coins and cameos are tough as well. The 1915 is an extremely watery looking proof and I would be really surprised to see any CAMS graded for that year.
I have been thinking about doing a set of proof Barbers or a set of proof later date Seated coins, denomination still being determined. You guys are luring me into the Barber quarters. Same rarity and beauty as the halves, at less cost. Maybe I will do both, proof Barber quarters and with motto Seated halves. I will probably consider attractively toned as well as CAM pieces. 66/67 will probably be my grade target for the quarters with maybe one 68 type piece. Send me a PM if you have any nice dups to lose.
Windycity:
What can I say but I hate you!!! BTW, I assume you are from Chicago. I lived there for many years, perhaps we know each other.
Greg
<< <i> I read that some gold coins, circa 1902 or thereabouts, had no cameo at all (like most 1936-72 US Proofs). Does anyone have any more information on this? >>
I have also heard rumor that there are DCAM forgeries of proof gold coins having frost etched into the devices using lasers and actually passing the grading companies.
I don't have any dupes but it would be really cool to have someone else on board.
bruce scher