Cameo SMS Half and Quarter and DCAM 64 Quarter??

Ethan · February 8, 2014 9:41AM

I looked through some sets and I will post some pics, not the best pics but the best I can do...

Edit : I will add some more pictures, hopefully better ones...

First up, the 64 Quarter. This thing is just awesome. I was wanting a CAM Half but I think I like this better. This one is stunning in person...the mirrors are BLACK and the frost blazing white.

EDIT Pictures -
More pictures of all of these...I just can not get the mirror right! Sorry there is so many but I only posted 1/4 of what I took trying to get the best shot to see the contrast and mirrors.

Edit 2 - I need to clean this up...

1964 Proof Quarter

As for grade, well I am learning and I am guessing PR66/67. I notice no imperfections but I am not really sure. I would be happy with PR65 if DCAM. The mirrors are black but the frost is just white, nothing like the quarter above.

Next a 67 Kennedy, my wife opened the set and went "Wow!". When I saw it I knew what she meant. It is not the cleanest but it is the cleanest I own and blows all my other CAM's away...Grade? Again MS66/67, but that is a guess. I am not sure if it is good enough to go DCAM, but CAM is a slam dunk..

I will have to get more pics I guess.

Next is the best 66 quarter I have. I have not yet done the dimes, nickles, and pennies but this is definitely a CAM quarter. Grade MS65+...The mirrors are there but mildly black. The white is pretty good. Here are some better ones. As for the Milk Spots, any way to get rid of them? This would be a great quarter if it did not have them.

Thank you for looking and comments welcome.

ModCrewman · February 8, 2014 10:13AM

Some nice looking coins there Ethan. Congratulations on the find.

There's nothing like that "Wow!" factor when you open up a box or envelope and one just pops out at you.

The 1964 quarter looks great. From the obverse I'd say it has a nice shot at DCAM; but can't really tell from your photos of the reverse whether the reverse would make it or not.

The 1967 half looks nice as well. Without seeing the reverse, I'd say it's got a decent shot at CAM, but I'm not seeing a DCAM there. The contrast just isn't strong enough.

The fields on the obverse of the 1966 quarter don't look quite deep enough to make a CAM designation and as I'm sure you know the milk spots are a big downer...certainly not worth the fees to have it graded with the milk spots. The reverse looks very nice and a probably CAM; but of course you need both sides to make the designation.

Keep hunting and working on your pictures. Using the micro function on your camera will help focus closely, and using a copy stand and/or the timer function on your camera will improve the focus a lot.

Here are a few of my friends from the dates you've shown:

PCGS SP65 CAM

PCGS SP68

PCGS PR68 CAM

Ethan · February 8, 2014 10:43AM

Thank you so much for the reply. I will try some different pictures with a better camera I hope. I will add them to original post if I can.

EDIT : Ok all updated with better ( I hope) pictures. If someone would like to take a stab at grades I would be ok with it. I would like to know if any would be worth slabbing.

Thank you very much.

Ethan

ricko · February 9, 2014 2:10AM

Nice coins.... will you be sending them in for grading?? Cheers, RickO

Ethan · February 9, 2014 8:22AM

<< Nice coins.... will you be sending them in for grading?? Cheers, RickO >>

Thanks, I really like them.

Probably not as I am not a member, if I would I guess it would be ANACS but they do not sell as well but I really don't care as I will not be selling them. Plus I am not sure if they would grade enough to justify it. The 64 quarter would be the best bet, but the half, if IT got DCAM then I guess it would be worth it.

Ethan · February 9, 2014 12:40PM

I tried dipping the 67 Quarter. The only thing it did was clean the haze, the 'Boogie' is still there just cleaner...

bummer.

Ethan · February 10, 2014 9:40AM

PCGS SP65 CAM

<< Why only 65? I can not see what this issue would be for not getting a 66. What am I missing? >>

PCGS SP68

<< Not a CAM? Hmm...sure looks like it to me, I just do not get it especially with that reverse >>

PCGS PR68 CAM

>>

<< Again, not a DCAM...wow...that looks awesome! And 68 as well, not too shabby. I might have you on the frosting but I doubt the PR68, that is one nice quarter >>

ModCrewman · February 10, 2014 10:00AM

Your comments on those photos were pretty much my thoughts exactly. These are the coins holding spots in my set currently. I shared them to let you know just how difficult it is to get a handle on the CAM/DCAM designations. Though it is certainly a lot of fun looking.

Based on your updated photos:

I don't think your 1964 quarter will get a DCAM designation. I'm seeing it as maybe a 66 CAM as the fields do show a few imperfections.

I think your Kennedy has a 70% chance of getting a CAM designation. Also I'm not seeing it as higher than a 65 grade.

The 1966 quarter would be about a 64 with a 50/50 shot a getting a CAM designation. I've submitted plenty of the SMS quarters with mixed results.

Your photos are good enough that you can see the depth of fields or lack thereof. I frequently can't understand why a coin didn't receive a CAM/DCAM designation until I take photos and you see that the fields aren't as deep as they might appear in hand.

There's hope in this niche of the hobby. I've put together a top-15 registry set of 1950-64 proofs from raw buys over the past 3 years. ModCrewman Collection But I've also paid a ton of tuition on grading fees that were wasted. I'd say the key to improving your eye is to be honest with yourself on submissions (document your expected grades and compare when they come back), and be willing to learn from the results you get back.

Ethan · February 10, 2014 10:27AM

Thank you... I am learning but I have a long way to go. I have purchased some CAM halves etc to judge from, both NGC and PCGS and the occasional ANACS and ICG. I doubt I will ever know as I will not pay $30 to submit one and I just like looking and learning. Do not get me wrong, if I think I have one that is worth three figures I might attempt to get it slabbed. This is for fun for me and the wife and it all started roll searching. That is when I figured out that to find a MS66/67 in a roll was damn near impossible. This also took some slab purchases to get the hang of. I have filled four half sets (Kennedy's) now with what I believe to be MS60-66, most 60/61 with a few AU's thrown in. It is neat to learn and spend time with the wife although I have spent some $, it is nothing that I did not get enjoyment out of for sure.

This even was a good purchase and makes the hunt that much more fun..

<< Your comments on those photos were pretty much my thoughts exactly. These are the coins holding spots in my set currently. I shared them to let you know just how difficult it is to get a handle on the CAM/DCAM designations. Though it is certainly a lot of fun looking. >>

Oh I understand for sure. I have went through lots of sets and have yet to find that one that makes me start shaking. The 64 quarter is the best so far but the Camera just doesn't grab the mirror right. I need to learn to use my Camera better

<< I don't think your 1964 quarter will get a DCAM designation. I'm seeing it as maybe a 66 CAM as the fields do show a few imperfections. >>

Bummer....I can see the 66 and that was my guess a 66/67

<< I think your Kennedy has a 70% chance of getting a CAM designation. Also I'm not seeing it as higher than a 65 grade. >>

Cool, 70% is good. I have a few SMS graded 66 Cam and this one blows them away, but again the pictures are not that good.

<< The 1966 quarter would be about a 64 with a 50/50 shot a getting a CAM designation. I've submitted plenty of the SMS quarters with mixed results. >>

Yeah I am not to sure of this one. The Milk Boogie does it no good for sure. Next up is the pennies, nickles, and dimes...

<< Your photos are good enough that you can see the depth of fields or lack thereof. I frequently can't understand why a coin didn't receive a CAM/DCAM designation until I take photos and you see that the fields aren't as deep as they might appear in hand. >>

By deep fields I understand that to be the mirror. Would this be correct? I tend to try and look at it mirror shine and see if the relief is white etc.

<< There's hope in this niche of the hobby. I've put together a top-15 registry set of 1950-64 proofs from raw buys over the past 3 years. ModCrewman Collection But I've also paid a ton of tuition on grading fees that were wasted. I'd say the key to improving your eye is to be honest with yourself on submissions (document your expected grades and compare when they come back), and be willing to learn from the results you get back. >>

I bookmarked that for reference. That is a nice set of coins and I too looked at some of them and wondered how they could not be Cameo. However that 1950's quarter is a stunner. Plus I noticed you have some only 1 or 2 population higher. To think you just started and most were RAW gives me hope. Thank you!

Cheers

SanctionII · February 10, 2014 12:19PM

Welcome to the forums.

I see that you like the Cameo proof and SMS coins from the 50's and 60's.

I collect in that area also. A number of people on the forums collect in this area, some more so than others. These coins can be very attractive and if you look long and hard enough you can still find raw examples of these coins in proof and SMS sets in original packaging, or in aftermarket holders. You can also find raw singles. Finding them raw usually allows you to pick them up for lower price than if you bought a slabbed example.

There are numerous threads on the subject of Cameos that have been posted over the years. You can pull up these old threads by using the search function. Some of the threads have great photographs in them.

You take nice pictures by the way.

Ethan · February 10, 2014 1:22PM

<< Welcome to the forums. >>

Thanks

<< I see that you like the Cameo proof and SMS coins from the 50's and 60's.

I collect in that area also. A number of people on the forums collect in this area, some more so than others. These coins can be very attractive and if you look long and hard enough you can still find raw examples of these coins in proof and SMS sets in original packaging, or in aftermarket holders. You can also find raw singles. Finding them raw usually allows you to pick them up for lower price than if you bought a slabbed example. >>

That is my journey! I love it, I will not get rich, actually I will most likely loose but I am having a ball doing it.

<< There are numerous threads on the subject of Cameos that have been posted over the years. You can pull up these old threads by using the search function. Some of the threads have great photographs in them. >>

Oh yeah, read em back to 2002. Most of the pictures are gone but the knowledge is still there. It took me half a day to read them. Then again it made me aware of the pennies, nickles, dimes, quarters etc. I am a half guy but I will look at these also and look for the elusive 65 Cam pennies that I know are not in my sets

<< You take nice pictures by the way. >>

Thanks but I have a hard time taking these, I have a decent digital camera, and a USB microscope so I try to utilize them as best I can but I am getting better the more I try. Still getting that Cameo angle and relief is tough as heck.

SanctionII · February 10, 2014 1:34PM

When you get time, look at the 1950-1964 proof sets Registry Set of our own Cameonut. His coins in this set are Trueview photographed and available for viewing. His set is drop dead gorgeous if you like Cameos.

Ethan · February 10, 2014 1:55PM

I can not seem to find it on the PCGS site. I have searched Cameonut and I get links to this forum.

EDIT...I am a doofus....its on his links...got it thanks.

coindudeonebay · February 11, 2014 9:00AM

I think the 64 quarter is a deep cameo, but unless it's a 68 dcam probably not worth getting graded.

The 66 quarter, the reverse is iffy and the spots have probably been there for so long that they probably won't totally come off. There's also that spot on the reverse at 12 o'clock. I doubt it would grade higher than a 64 and at that point not worth grading.

The 67 half looks nice but the reverse might keep it from going cam. Again, unless it's a 67 cam probably not worth grading unless you just want to test your grading skills.

Here are a few I recently took pictures of that I'm considering sending in. Scratches are on the plastic holder.

And forgive me for hijacking the thread but ModCrew started it!

Ethan · February 11, 2014 9:53AM

Thanks for the 64 Dcam estimate. I too think it will at least on the obverse....I will not send it in but I like the thrill of the hunt. As for your coins, nice clean and I hope you get the rating. One thing though, if that dime doesn't get it then something is wrong, that is one outstanding reverse! The second Kennedy is a no brainer for me. Congrats!

Cameo SMS Half and Quarter and DCAM 64 Quarter??

Comments

Leave a Comment