Question for proof Jefferson nickel collectors.

CoinAddict

What usually keeps a proof 1957 Jefferson nickel from getting the cameo designation? Is there an area on the coin that does not recieve deep enough mirrors in the field? I was just curious. Your answers are truly appreciated.
Kyle

Cam40

this is a question for keets and carlwohlforth really but i,ll chime in anyway......
breaks in the frost in the devices would keep a coin from CAM or DCAM i think.
but, you knew that anyway didnt you......just wanted to post.......sorry....

CoinAddict

Here are pics of my 1957 that is graded PR-66.
1957 Jefferson nickel OBV showing mirrors
1957 Jefferson Nickel REV showing mirrors
1957 OBV showing luster
1957 REV showing luster
I compared this coin with my 1956 that is graded PR-67 CAM. I do not see any difference at all between the mirrors and frost on the two coins. So what am I missing here. All of your help is appreciated.

Cam40

in this case i,d say the devices may not be frosty enough for a cam designation.
usually there must be a good contrast between the devices and fields, with no breaks in the frost
ofcourse. so contrast is my best guess on this one.

ksteelheader

Going by what I see in the pictures and not having the coin in hand, I have to agree that it does not have enough contrast for cameo designation.....Ken

spy88

Kyle,

In order to qualify as a Cam or DCam, the devices must have a frosty look to them that is highlighted by the fields mirrors. If the distinction is little to non-existent, it is NOT a Cam or DCam. There will be no "shine" or luster to Jefferson, the lettering (obv/rev) and the Monticello. For a Cam/DCam attribute, the raised areas of the coin would appear as if frost or rime was on them.

Your pics show a very nice GEM Proof, but not a Cam/Dcam.

David

CarlWohlforth

That year is one of the toughest of the years for cameo proof Jeffersons. There are some others as well. In fact there are less DCAM Jeffersons from the 50s than any other issue if I have my info straight. I think there are less than a handful graded DCAM in all grades put together for '57.

The reverse on that Jeff looks more frosted than the obverse. It is possible your '56 got a break.

RGL

Kyle:

Plenty of '57s can be found with great luster/mirrors and some can be had with light to moderate cameos, but it is very difficult to pair up the two together, both obverse and reverse. This date, and others may disagree, strikes me as having a lot of one-sided cameos. The 1957 is a key date in CAM Jeffs, as you know, because I do not think this was a banner year for the Mint, production wise. Few new dies that would at least first impart cameo contrast seem to have been used and the Mint apparently did not repolish a lot of dies to again produce some CAMS. On Jeffs, 1957 was not a banner year for quality. This date seems afflicted with many weak strikes/worn dies, certainly more than most any date.

That said, you need to find one of the scarce Jeffs with CAM on both sides and then it must have the mirrors to provide the needed contrast. A Jeff, or any coin, can have light contrast, but if the overall effect of Tom's head or Monticello is more lustrous than frosted -- tends to reflect light instead of there being none or reducing the light to a dull sheen -- you lose. PCGS generally requires a no-doubt CAM for the designation and does not give it to tweeners. There are many coins out there that Jeff proof specialists would recognize as CAMs, but PCGS does not. There are thus a lot of PQ coins with CAM contrast that sell at little or no premium by those who do not know the series. Hopes this helps ...

CoinAddict

Thanks for your help guys. I really appreciate it.