Did the US Mint really understand the cause to the frost contrast effect on proofs back then? Not even in Heritage's alleged enhanced pics, does the reverse appear to have strong frost contrast between the fields and the devices. The two examples I have wouldn't meet PCGS's standards for cameos but they are cameo proofs by my understanding. Only the very first strikes developed this cameo effect and it took years for the US Mint to understand how to manipulate/enhance the dies to produce them on a massive scale. Yes, there is something very special about these early frosted proofs.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
BaronVonBaugh
Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭✭
Comments
<< <i>the "juiced" picture makes it look DCAM. >>
I agree with you.
According to the Heritage price history on the same page, one sold for $763 with the buyer's fee in April.
About the only thing we know for sure: There are at least 2 bidders on Heritage who really want a PR67CAM 1950 nickel....
(And to think I'm fretting about bidding half that on an 1803 large cent. I need to win the lottery.
PR67CAM
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>It closed at $4,112.50 w/BP, so a couple of people must think it will DCAM. >>
Internet bidder too.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I actually need one and bid on this one early on. I dropped out when they went past the guide price.