Pair of 1950 proof Lincolns back from PCGS

coolkarma

Recently, I got back two 1950 proof Lincolns from PCGS. I thought the first had a shot at 65DCam, but at least it came back 65 Cameo. I was hoping, but not expecting, a 66Cam for the second. It came back 67 no cam, which is good enough for my registry set Overall happy, but not thrilled.




I'm also still learning to take digital pictures so suggestions would be appreciated (this is my first upload to the forum). As usual, both coins look nicer reflecting in the light. The 65Cam has deeper mirrors while the 67 has clear mirrors (though the mirrors are satiny, not deep). Suggestions?

badger

Coolkarma,

What does it take these days for a DCAM Lincoln in the early 1950's? That looks DCAM.

What are the keys to getting a DCAM for the Lincolns?

Great looking coins. Where did you get the coins? Were they from proof sets?

badger

How does the 65 Cam compare to your 1956 and 1954 Lincs? The photos in your registry look very similar to the 1950.

coolkarma

Badger,
They are all very close. I think the picture of the 1956 is a little off because the coin is mounted a little crooked in the holder (the top of the coin is little further from the surface of the holder than the bottom). The 1950 may have slightly less frost than the 1954 and 1956 but the mirrors may be a bit deeper than the 1954's. However, the 1954 and 1956 both have "cleaner" mirrors - there are some discoloration spots and specs on the 1950 (which is why I call it a 65). I'm not sure what is required for an early 1950's dcam now, but apparently it is a little better than this 1950 I have a 1954 I may send in after another wait.

The pr65cam was purchased sight-seen as a pr65dcam from a dealer I trust. The pr67 was purchased raw on eBay (as a cameo, of course). They were less than $100 a piece so I did ok.

badger

You are my hero - purchasing the coin raw on EBay with that result.

coolkarma

Badger,
Thanks. As you must suspect, I have had some less than stellar purchases of raw coins on eBay However, those wouldn't be appropriate posts for the PCGS Set Registry Forum

jonesy

I like em both!! Congrats!!

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

The first coin looks Deep Cameo and the second looks ???

Wait three months and send them in again raw and see how they grade

Stewart

Steve

Richard,
How does the reverse on both of those coins look?
Steve

coolkarma

Jonesy, Thanks, I like them both too

Stewart, Thanks. The second coin is one of those that look outstanding as you rotate it in the light. Nice color, mellow contrast. However, up close (10 X) the fields have a million little white dots. A lovely coin but probably not cameo.
I probably should take your advice for the 65Cam. We'll see how I feel in a few months.

Steve, The reverse of the 65Cam is about the same as the obverse, perhaps a tad less deep and fewer discoloration spots and specs. It's fairly comparable to the 1954 and 1956 reverses. The 67's reverse is like the obverse except there are a few scattered marks which is why I gave it a 66. Both coins (particularly the 65Cam) have an interesting feature I don't quite know how to describe. The fields on the reverse aren't perfectly flat. I think they rise a little to meet the letters. You can see it in the reflection pattern as you tilt the coins. Perhaps they needed one more strike from the dies. I've noticed this on some other early 50's proofs (e.g., my 52, 53, and 54 to a lesser extent), but it seems to be less prevalent (i.e., I haven't seen any) after 1954. Your thoughts?

Richard

ellewood

Are you looking to sell the extra the 65 CAM? Please PM if you are. I've been looking for a 50 for a while.

Thx -

Toby

coolkarma

Ellewood,
At this point, I think I'm going to take Stewart's advice, at least the wait three months part. If after waiting I decide to sell, I'll let you know

SanctionII

Coolkarma, I like both coins. I am collecting cameo Lincolns from 1950-1975. I stumbled across a 1950 a few years ago that looks very much like your 65cam. I traded a brilliant 1950 plus $20.00 for the 1950 cam. I am very pleased with it.

It is sitting in a capital plastics type holder with proof lincolns from 1950-1975. The coins I have collected are all cameo to some degree. The last coin I needed was a 1958 cameo which I finally found last August. The weakest of the bunch is my 1953. It has frosted devices but the fields just do not make it. The fields are hazy just like your 1950 PF67.

Cameonut

Coolkarma
I like both as well. The 65 looks dcam to me - at least on the obverse. It might be worth a second trip to Newport Beach. PCGS is really picky on the mirrors which is probably why the 67 didn't make cam. Still a nice piece - if you are selling the 67 you might try NGC - I have had them designate cam on coins like that. At least you can get something for the designation in that grade.

SanctionII

Has anyone had any success doing anything to remove the haze on 1950's era cameo lincolns [like the pictured 1950 PF67]?

I have a couple of 1950's era proof lincolns that would have a nice cameo look if only the haze could be removed. To date I have not been willing to do anything with the coins to remove the haze since I have no idea if it can be done without ruining the coin.

Anyone have any experience in this area? If so please educate us.

Cameonut

I used to use diluted MS70 to remove haze. Dilute with 3 parts water to one part MS70. Carefully swab on the entire surface with a Q-tip and rinse, rinse, rinse, with running water. If you don't rinse well, the haze will return. Pat dry carefully with paper napkins or tissue. This will take off most haze that occurs in mint packaging. It will not remove PVC haze - for that I used acetone.

On that 50, I would opt to send it to NCS for conservation. It is too easy to cause damage if you are not careful.