Options
Cameonut's big adventure
Cameonut
Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭✭✭
Lately, I have been setting up at local shows as a "wannabe dealer" to sell off some of my extra pieces and get a taste of what it is like to try to make a living as a numismatist. I was surprised at the long hours, non-stop work, and relative inability to look at other dealers' inventory. But that is not the reason for this thread.
After a grueling (but successful) Charlotte show last weekend, I decided to take this week off and go to a show instead of setup at one. It was nice getting back to a leisurely stroll thru the bourse and looking at anything that interested me. So I hit the show right after opening yesterday and started looking around. At the last table, I found this plain proof set - housed in an old jewelry box and replacement poly bags instead of the normal cello bags. Obviously no where near original government packaging. (Sorry I didn't take a pic before freeing the coins from the bags, but you all know how important it is to open it NOW!
So why was I so interested in this proof set? I detected a nice cameo reverse on the nickel - the other coins were average at best and somewhat toned. Normally, not something I would take a second look at. But you should all know that those old cello bags (and poly bags) are notorious for hiding cameo contrast. I'll apologize in advance for my crummy photo skills - a handheld Nikon point-and-shoot and a table lamp.
Anyway, here is what the nickel looks like thru the poly bag. Not too exciting right? The reverse is what caught my eye.
So I get home late yesterday and don't get to review my haul until this afternoon. I cut those puppies out of their bags and started looking for varieties (cent, dime, and half) and cameos. I grinned from ear to ear when the nickel was lit up by my table lamp! I have been trying to find a nice 1954 dcam nickel for a number of years, but they are hard to find in PCGS holders much less "in the wild". Anyway, here are a few pics of the nickel. It is much harder to photograph than I thought - when I shoot straight on, the mirrors are so deep I get reflections of the camera body in the photo. Go off center and the frost gets muted.
Now I have a 1954 PCGS cameo and a 1954 NGC ultracameo for comparison. The raw coin is similar to the NGC in terms of having deep mirrors and frosted devices. It is a step above the PCGS cameo. The obverse has a little haze around the rim and on the shoulder, but nothing bad. The reverse is pretty clean. Both sides have no nicks but there are a couple of very tiny struck thru fibers in a couple of places.
I am pretty happy with this find as the set was $83 - and this will begin the adventure. It won't be long before it takes a ride to PCGS for their opinion. In the meantime, I figured that I would help others spot nice cameos "in the wild" - they are still out there, but on the endangered species list.
Comments are most welcome. When this comes back from PCGS (probably slow boat - so it will take a couple of months), I'll post the grade so we all learn something from it.
If I get some time, I'll attempt a better set of photos.
Cameonut
After a grueling (but successful) Charlotte show last weekend, I decided to take this week off and go to a show instead of setup at one. It was nice getting back to a leisurely stroll thru the bourse and looking at anything that interested me. So I hit the show right after opening yesterday and started looking around. At the last table, I found this plain proof set - housed in an old jewelry box and replacement poly bags instead of the normal cello bags. Obviously no where near original government packaging. (Sorry I didn't take a pic before freeing the coins from the bags, but you all know how important it is to open it NOW!
So why was I so interested in this proof set? I detected a nice cameo reverse on the nickel - the other coins were average at best and somewhat toned. Normally, not something I would take a second look at. But you should all know that those old cello bags (and poly bags) are notorious for hiding cameo contrast. I'll apologize in advance for my crummy photo skills - a handheld Nikon point-and-shoot and a table lamp.
Anyway, here is what the nickel looks like thru the poly bag. Not too exciting right? The reverse is what caught my eye.
So I get home late yesterday and don't get to review my haul until this afternoon. I cut those puppies out of their bags and started looking for varieties (cent, dime, and half) and cameos. I grinned from ear to ear when the nickel was lit up by my table lamp! I have been trying to find a nice 1954 dcam nickel for a number of years, but they are hard to find in PCGS holders much less "in the wild". Anyway, here are a few pics of the nickel. It is much harder to photograph than I thought - when I shoot straight on, the mirrors are so deep I get reflections of the camera body in the photo. Go off center and the frost gets muted.
Now I have a 1954 PCGS cameo and a 1954 NGC ultracameo for comparison. The raw coin is similar to the NGC in terms of having deep mirrors and frosted devices. It is a step above the PCGS cameo. The obverse has a little haze around the rim and on the shoulder, but nothing bad. The reverse is pretty clean. Both sides have no nicks but there are a couple of very tiny struck thru fibers in a couple of places.
I am pretty happy with this find as the set was $83 - and this will begin the adventure. It won't be long before it takes a ride to PCGS for their opinion. In the meantime, I figured that I would help others spot nice cameos "in the wild" - they are still out there, but on the endangered species list.
Comments are most welcome. When this comes back from PCGS (probably slow boat - so it will take a couple of months), I'll post the grade so we all learn something from it.
If I get some time, I'll attempt a better set of photos.
Cameonut
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
0
Comments
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
Thanks for the write up.
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
Is the reverse lettering strong enough for PCGS to Cameo though?
peacockcoins
sometime during 1954 i thought the Mint made the change to polybags from cello, correct?
www.KevinDSmithwick.com
Now am I correct that original mint packaging can hide cameo?
because I have a few that look cam but not that cam and I've
been afraid to cut them open, you have me curious now.
Steve
<< <i>replacement poly bags instead of the normal cello bags. Obviously no where near original government packaging.
sometime during 1954 i thought the Mint made the change to polybags from cello, correct? >>
You know, you might be right! I have been told that the cellophane bags were standard until the boxed packs were phased out in 1955, but I have seen quite a few 1954 and 1955 proof sets in poly bags instead. I always assumed these were not OGP - especially since the staple tends to be pristine compare to the older rusty staples you see on early '50's sets. But then again, maybe the Mint figured out that cello bags were damaging the coins in several ways and decided to make a change.
As far as the date goes, it is my birth year, so it holds special significance to me. I used to have a PCGS dcam Jefferson in my collection, but alas, it was artificially frosted. And that is another story - replacing that dcam has been quite a chore.
With respect to the packaging - I also desired to show to other collectors that cameos can easily be hidden by the packaging of that era. Be cautious and careful, but there are cameos out there that are yet to be discovered.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
You are correct that coins inside mint packaging [brittle sleeves from 1950-54, poly bags from 1954-55, flat packs from 1955-64 and flat pack for 1965 SMS sets] can be hard to evaluate. The packaging makes assessments of the coins very uncertain. Coins that look CAM may not be and coins that look non CAM can be CAM.
Franklin-Lover's Forum
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
that's probably just an impression in the PolyBag where the rim of the coin rested for a long period with other coin(s) on top of it
You know, you might be right! I have been told that the cellophane bags were standard until the boxed packs were phased out in 1955, but I have seen quite a few 1954 and 1955 proof sets in poly bags instead.
I also believe this to be the case. I've seen the same thing over the years.
I knew it would happen.
I just realized this was an older thread when I saw the Carl Wohlforth reply.
I miss Carl.
<< <i>So what did this finally grade?? >>
The coin in question graded 68 cameo at PCGS. I have debated whether to crack and resubmit. I thought I had at least a 50% shot at a dcam. That's the way it goes sometimes.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!