1964 Cameo Accented Hair..Grade ReQ..POLL.. NEW PICS!

Ethan · March 29, 2014 1:25PM

*** New pics at bottom ** best I can get I think

Well I have been collecting Kennedy's for a while and I had only (2) AH ones. One a NGC PR67 and the other a raw that maybe would get PR62 as it is not an attractive coin at all.

Well tonight I was sorting out my 64 Proofs and checking all for any DDO's & Cams. Well I found one DDO and it is mildly Cameo but as I got to my last four to sort, I got to the "I" and I was a little bit giddy. It was in last 4 which meant the best possible CAM candidates. It had been a while so I double checked this site:

AH details

It was confirmed. Now I was excited as I had found one in the wild. I always wanted a CAM version and now I have one. I guess the grade is a minimum of PR66 but I think it might get PR67 and just maybe PR68. It is a stunner. However I just plain stink at taking pictures but I did get some worth posting. I hope they are enough for someone to get a good guess at the grade..at take a stab at the value. I am guessing north of $250....

First the Obverse..

****************** Updated Pictures, it is the best I can get with my cam in Macro Mode.....Yes I think that is Cat hair....Those long hairs shed. I wish my Lab would eat them but he just wants to play with them..**********

Now the Reverse,

Now some close ups with a MicroCam (not the best but it does get close but makes it look like a dust ball).

The actual accented hair,

The "I" Serif,

The broken ray,

The straight 'G',

It is a Cameo for sure and AH is 100%, now the grade is what really makes the find. Do not get me wrong, I no longer have to buy me a Cameo AH and even if it grades low I am still one happy camper. I told my wife I would find something of value one day. I think she might be a little upset as she has to date found the most valued piece which is a 1973 Rotated Reverse Kennedy in AU/BU. I figure that one is a little north of $100 as I have only found mention of one other..

Please tell me what you think? I posted this on another board also as I like them both.

Oh a couple of other Kennedy's that I have to compare with..as PR67.

This is one of my favorites, as there are only 8 with NGC and 5 with PCGS....both of these compare very well with the AH in question....thanks.

Ethan · March 29, 2014 2:03PM

I forgot to ask, if you vote can you please explain why you voted the way you did? I am trying to learn how to grade Kennedy's and although I am getting better, I have a lot to learn.

I notice someone voted NOT a cameo....I find this interesting and that is why I put that choice in there. I have slabbed CAM versions of 64,66,67,68,69,70, and 71's. I have DCAMs of some of those so I have a general idea but I could also be wrong. I also have a PR68 64 Kennedy that I use but to be honest I can tell no difference with the PR67 ones that I have. I think I have a good understanding of 60-65, 66/67 are ok but higher I have difficulty determining just how to grade it. I use the ANA book and start counting bag marks and other items to try and come up with the slabbed score. I most of the time am not successful but I look through a 30X loupe and not the 10X they say to use.

Raybo · March 29, 2014 4:54PM

You're as bad as I am at imaging.
It might be cam but I have no idea by your images.

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD · March 29, 2014 5:02PM

I vote DCAM...Nice Coin

Erik

Cameonut · March 29, 2014 10:07PM

I called it a 66 cam based on the photos. No question it it an Accented Hair variety.
I don't think the mirrors are deep enough to get a dcam designation - PCGS loves deeeep mirrors. The marks on the cheek, neck, and near the ear will likely keep it from a higher grade.

No matter what happens, it is always fun to cherrypick yourself. If this came from a proof set, did you check for the pointed 9 dime?

Ethan · March 29, 2014 10:17PM

9 pointed dime?? Do you have a link with information that could tell me what to look for?

I know nothing about it.........and yes it came from a proof set. Of course I have opened quite a few so I would have no way to get the dime that came from that set. However, I do have a box with all the dimes that I got from the sets, if I found a Cameo one I pulled it out...

Here are the ones I thought worth pulling...

Tookybandit · March 29, 2014 10:44PM

Nice coins Ethan! I have an old rattler '64 Ken that appears to be an AH! I have had it for a while now and one of these days I need to send that bad boy in so it can be re-graded! I love the look of yours, great find!!

Ethan · March 29, 2014 11:17PM

<< No matter what happens, it is always fun to cherrypick yourself. If this came from a proof set, did you check for the pointed 9 dime? >>

AH looking now...

pointed 9 Dime explanation

At least these two are blunted 9 not pointed...

keets · March 29, 2014 11:41PM

I won't offer a grade I'll just say that the strike is a bit weak.

ricko · March 30, 2014 1:44AM

Difficult from those pictures, however, it may go CAM.... Have to say 65...may be better in hand.... Cheers, RickO

Ethan · March 30, 2014 4:29AM

<< I won't offer a grade I'll just say that the strike is a bit weak. >>

hmm - I never really noticed that but you are right, especially the reverse. I have read that the shield on the AH variety are weaker than the type 2. Is this to what you refer or overall in general. I can not tell it is any weaker than the slabbed one. Can you give me details so I can understand? Thanks.

NotSure · March 30, 2014 4:37AM

Is that spot next to the 'H' in 'HALF' toning or.......???

Ethan · March 30, 2014 4:51AM

I am not really sure.

At first I thought milk spot but when I turn it just right you can not see it anymore so to speak......After looking closer it is a blemish for sure.

I assumed a milk spot now I am not so sure. If I look it is just on the surface and if tilted nothing can be seen so what else could it be?

I wonder if sent in for slabbing if they could clean this one up a bit...restore or something.

coindudeonebay · March 30, 2014 5:59AM

I vote 64 cam.

Ethan · March 30, 2014 8:10AM

<< I vote 64 cam. >>

Well I did not add that as a choice but I am 90% sure it is better than PR64 unless the 'spot' on the reverse cost two grades.

So far the results please me, 75% cam with a median around 66/67.......

Might be worth slabbing it...

Ethan · March 31, 2014 6:24AM

I have sent these pictures to a Cameo expert I know. I am anxious to here what he says.

The Results of my poll are telling, over 68% say its cam with 7.5% saying it has a shot at DCAM. That is cool.

The grade seems to average on high PR66 to a low PR67. I would be pleased with either.

Still, I thought about a new camera just for this sort of thing and I realized looking at the pictures that it is not the camera it is me. I need to learn to 'capture' the deep mirrors and frosted parts. It is hard to do that. Looking at the coin even with the spot, I am thinking that if I had a coin to be slabbed this would be one of those. The other one would be the 73 rotated reverse in EF/AU condition as I would have the population of 1 which would be neat in itself.

I am not sure what I will do but I am not planning on sending 20 some odd coins in anymore as it is too much of a hassle.

telephoto1 · March 31, 2014 6:51AM

Pics are too poor to tell but based strictly on what I can see, probably cameo, definitely not DCAM.

ModCrewman · March 31, 2014 6:58AM

I'll call it a 65 CAM. Hard to tell from the photos just how clean the fields are or aren't. I don't see any shot at a DCAM given that the fields aren't very deep; though the frost looks very strong.

If it doesn't get cleaned up before submission a 64 CAM wouldn't shock me.

Constantine · March 31, 2014 7:01AM

I first said it is not a cameo based on the first pics, but now that better pictures are provided, it does look CAM to me. At least a 65. A dip by someone who knows what they are doing would help too I bet.

telephoto1 · March 31, 2014 7:41AM

Dipping contrasted piece could be dicey. That said I'd consider doing it in this case to get rid of the reverse spot, something that hurts it imo. I voted a hesitant 65 cam.

Ethan · March 31, 2014 9:09AM

I just can not get the color right and with my camera it appears the half is full of dust particles. A mirror is downright impossible to grab.....I have some more pictures but I am not sure they help.

I give up.....

Ethan · April 1, 2014 7:24AM

Well those that voted not cameo never said why. I think it is because I had such poor pictures.

The information I am getting now is for sure CAM but graded PR65....I really want to know what kills the grade so bad. It can not be one of those spots on the back. The grading standards as I found them,

<< Proof-67 - Official A.N.A. Definition of The Grade Proof-67
Definition: Has full mirror (or other style Proof) surface and sharp strike for the variety. May have
three or four very small contact marks and one more noticeable but not detracting mark. A few
hairlines may show under magnification, or one or two partially hidden scuff marks or flaws may be
present. Eye appeal is exceptional. If copper, the coin has attractive color (mint red or blended to
brown), only a few flyspecks, and no spots. Contact Marks: 3 or 4 minuscule. 1 or 2 may be in prime
focal areas. •Hairlines: None visible without magnification. • Fields: Above average. Fully original. • Eye
Appeal: Exceptional. >>

Why can this not meet that criteria?

Mirrors > Check
Deep Fields > Check
Contact marks well see the "Making the Grade" pictures, these parts are all in great shape.

All these areas are fine.

What am I missing? I would really hope it is just the crappy picture because I compare it to 64 Kennedy's that I have slabbed in PR67 and this one is just as good if not better.

fcloud · April 1, 2014 7:31AM

I vote not cameo. The reverse doesn't have enough contrast for me.

coindudeonebay · April 1, 2014 7:37AM

I would say that overall eye appeal held this one down. The spot on the reverse hurts for sure. Also the sizable hit on the neck is a detractor and there is a picture that shows possible hairlines on the obverse field in front of the nose. I suspect those are toning striations. Spottiness in the fields don't help it.

Ethan · April 1, 2014 7:58AM

Reverse - no contrast.... fair statement but I think that is due to the pictures.

...The spot ...granted...the neck hit...yeah not sure how it got there but you are allowed a few to make PR67, and that one is for sure one of the worst spots on the coin..

So I decided to use my camera phone and I am surprised with the results..I think they are actually a bit better especially with the field mirrors. Do these pictures better show the coin or the ones I originally posted? I am trying to learn how to take good pictures of coins so this is way too many but that is how you learn.

ModCrewman · April 1, 2014 8:17AM

Let's just focus on this one picture for analysis of why we're saying your coin is not likely to grade a 67.

1. Look at the white in the field running in an arc from the I of Liberty below the bust to the Y of Liberty. That is not a Deep field; for DCAM the field must be nearly entirely black at almost every angle. Many of your photos show this. Which is why several people are telling you it may not get a CAM designation. I personally think you'll get a CAM...no shot at DCAM; regardless of how frosty it is.

2. See the horizontal lines in front of his eye? Those appear to be hairlines, as do the two marks below the T of Liberty. Coupled with what looks to be a small hairline in the hair above his ear, as well as on his cheek in front of the ear, and across the cheek just right of his mouth will limit the grade. The haze in the field visible below the bust around the date will also limit the grade. There also appear to be small flaws in the planchet between the 9 and 6 and 6 and 4, as well as just below the O of God.

Proof grading truly is that picky...which is why the high grade and designated coins are worth more. Even if you just cut it out of the Cellophane, it's likely to have several of these imperfections.

Again, I believe your coin to be a 65 CAM or possibly even a 64 CAM...but I've only submitted about 600 proofs from 1950-70 in the past 3 years...so what do I know.

coindudeonebay · April 1, 2014 8:19AM

Two hairlines at eye level on the obverse. One hairline between the 1 and 9 in the date. There is also a decent line going across the cheek at ear level. I would have called this a 64.

Ethan · April 1, 2014 9:43AM

<< Let's just focus on this one picture for analysis of why we're saying your coin is not likely to grade a 67. >>

Thank you so much, this is the best reply I have had and I really do appreciate it. I am trying to learn and you broke it down for me so I could 'see' the reasons. At first read I broke the coin out again to look through my 2x glass. Some of the things that show up in the picture are not there no matter the angle, but then again there are things there that are not in the picture either, strange indeed.

<< 1. Look at the white in the field running in an arc from the I of Liberty below the bust to the Y of Liberty. That is not a Deep field; for DCAM the field must be nearly entirely black at almost every angle. Many of your photos show this. Which is why several people are telling you it may not get a CAM designation. I personally think you'll get a CAM...no shot at DCAM; regardless of how frosty it is. >>

Ok so no shot at DCAM, I can see that and I knew it was a stretch. The reason I though it had a shot was the blackness of the field. I can pull out a 76 proof and the 76 will be much better than this 64 so I think I can see your point. Although I look for your description, i can not see a difference in the mirrored field from the I to the Y, it appears to be the same all over the coin. I will mark that one up to my bad eyes I guess.

<< 2. See the horizontal lines in front of his eye? Those appear to be hairlines, as do the two marks below the T of Liberty. Coupled with what looks to be a small hairline in the hair above his ear, as well as on his cheek in front of the ear, and across the cheek just right of his mouth will limit the grade. The haze in the field visible below the bust around the date will also limit the grade. There also appear to be small flaws in the planchet between the 9 and 6 and 6 and 4, as well as just below the O of God. >>

Now this is funny, I have spend minutes looking for it. I can plainly see it in the pictures but I can not see it on the coin at all. I see a worse one to the left that is three times as long but I can not see it in the picture.

The scratch above the ear, I can not see it. I look closer and still nothing. Can you still see it in the following picture?

I see very faint scratches around the 1 & 9. I assume these are the dreaded hairlines that I read about but I have to use a 30X to see them

Now between the 6 & 4 there is something, looks like spots but not milk spots per se. These imperfections are definitely there.

<< Proof grading truly is that picky...which is why the high grade and designated coins are worth more. Even if you just cut it out of the Cellophane, it's likely to have several of these imperfections. >>

I am starting to see this. If this very minor imperfections count that much against the grade then I can see why a PR67 is not in the cards. I still wonder when I look at a NGC PR67, I can not see that much difference between the two coins, grade wise. This is what I have to learn. I would like to very much thank you for spending the time to break it down for me. It has helped and I know better what to look for. I got out my microscope camera to snap some closer shots of the areas we are discussing. This camera can not show cameo very well at all but seems to show some of the items you speak of. I guess the next most important thing I need to do is get a good camera and learn how to use it, plus maybe take the cats far away as they shed on everything!

<< Again, I believe your coin to be a 65 CAM or possibly even a 64 CAM...but I've only submitted about 600 proofs from 1950-70 in the past 3 years...so what do I know.

>>

Well after 600 it would seem to be second nature and I will heed that experience for sure. Like I said, I am still very happy if it is only a PR65 CAM and it is only worth 1/3 of what I thought it was. It is still very special to me as I found it in the wild so it is exciting. Once again, thank you very much for explaining it to me. I can see the PR65 I guess as there are many more imperfections that I know not what to look for.

Thanks Again for such a detailed response

Ethan · April 1, 2014 9:45AM

<< Two hairlines at eye level on the obverse. One hairline between the 1 and 9 in the date. There is also a decent line going across the cheek at ear level. I would have called this a 64. >>

Thanks for your reply also. I think you saw some of the same things the previous poster did.

Cameonut · April 1, 2014 10:36AM

After seeing the updated photos, I would revise my guess from 66cam to 65 cam. That hit to the left of the ear is worse than I thought.

I still think it will cam at PCGS - no way a deep cam because the mirrors are not deep enough. I think the dust particles you mention are actually not dust, just flow marks from less than new dies.

I am not worried about strike. The obverse looks fine and the reverse on the accented hair is known to look like a weak strike. The edges of the shield are rounded, and this was sharpened on the updated dies that struck the non-AH proofs.

ModCrewman · April 1, 2014 11:17AM

For the sake of full disclosure...I was similarly giddy with a find early on in my proof hunting...guess what it graded??? 65 CAM

ModCrewman's 1964 Accented Hair Kennedy Find

Edit: What I referenced running from the I to the Y was based on what could be seen in the photo, based on the positioning of your light. Those were the spots in the field you could see the flow lines which prohibit the CAM designation; I fully expect under varied lighting angles the same flow lines are visible throughout the fields of the coin...in fact your various photos show that fact.

I wouldn't expect every photo to show every hairline, your attempting to get a closer look at the hairlines with a closer photo will almost always be ineffective. You should examine your coin closely rotating it under a good light, to see the hairlines that will be revealed...if it shows at any angle...it's there and will impact the coin's grade.

Ethan · April 1, 2014 11:43AM

Wow, I guess we had a similar find. That is cool.
I guess you never got it slabbed huh? I can see your point, the CAM is much harder to get than I thought. I wonder how the quarter in my avatar would do? I thought DCAM was a slam dunk. Maybe not..

ModCrewman · April 1, 2014 12:29PM

Ethan...I'd say your quarter has very little chance of a DCAM for the same reason as the Kennedy. Fields just aren't deep enough.

Ethan · April 1, 2014 12:33PM

Bummer....this is a stunning coin for sure but I will not bore you with all the pictures. This one I have to disagree, the best way I can describe it is it looks like a 84 proof. Then again I have been wrong before. Thanks. It is still by FAR the best silver quarter I have bar none..

1964 Cameo Accented Hair..Grade ReQ..POLL.. NEW PICS!

Comments

Leave a Comment