Home World & Ancient Coins Forum

canadian pl cameo grading question.

It appears to me that when comparing graded Canadian pl cameo coins from 1953 to about 1968 to their U.S. counterparts
the U.S. examples exibit a greater degree of polishing and therfore much deeper fields.
Is there a different criterion that the tpg's use when giving the cameo designation to a canadian
coin?
Thanks
Skip

Comments

  • ajaanajaan Posts: 17,070 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It has been my experience that TPGs have a difficult time telling Canadian MS from PL, from MSPL

    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • 1960NYGiants1960NYGiants Posts: 3,442 ✭✭✭✭
    PCGS does not designate cameo or deep cam for Canadian Proof-Like issues. The do use the cam and dcam for proofs though they have mistakenly call dcam PLs Proofs. Canada didn't start a proof coin program until 1981 so any slabbed as proof prior to that date are actually PLs or specimens (and they sometimes mix these up too.)

    edit to add: the non designated PLs is missing a market niche IMHO
    Gene

    Life member #369 of the Royal Canadian Numismatic Association
    Member of Canadian Association of Token Collectors

    Collector of:
    Canadian coins and pre-confederation tokens
    Darkside proof/mint sets dated 1960
    My Ebay
  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,719 ✭✭✭✭✭
    For dollars, it can be a challenge as others have stated-

    What Ajaan wrote really does make sense in terms of trying to sort these out-

    SP
    PL
    MS that has PL characteristics
    MS

    This really is tough for several different dates such as 1949, 1950 and 51 because of the high quality of the dies and production in general.

    With the Elizabeth II dollars, the quality is not as compelling. The challenge is not in finding quality PL examples but in quality MS examples. The business strikes will usually have more of a satin look that can be quite attractive , however they also come with bagmarks.

    There are still business strikes that have PL surfaces that can be quite attrctive as well- again, these have the same issue with bag marks. Quality MS examples can be confused with PL examples- it happens and it is not always easy to tell the difference. I look for die flow which MS coins will display more pronounced than the heavier mirror surface the PLs will have. My experience is this test works well for the Elizabeth dollars in the 1957-67 time frame.

    I apologize if all of this sounds confusing.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • Thanks gentlemen for your responses, as always you guys provide a wealth of info for us amateurs.
    I apologize for one more question (should have been in op.) but relates to the packaging of these sets.
    The 1964 & 1965 sets included a card describing the uncirculated coins in the package however the cards
    in the 1963 sets are blank leaving one to assume the coins are pl.
    In any case my ulterior motive here was in part to research these sets that my father left me years ago
    (3-63,s. 2-64,s and 4-65,s) with the intent to post these on the world, bst forum.
    As a side note I have saved a couple of these sets for birth years for my son and daughter in memory
    of their grandfather.
    In any case hope you all had a good Christmas and will have a happy new year.
    Thanks Again.
    Skip
    And the ? is Why are the cards blank in the 63 sets.Is this normal?
Sign In or Register to comment.