What do you think the prospects are for this new cello pack?? Free w/pictures.

keets · July 22, 2015 10:50AM

One of the advantages of working at a Coin Shop is that I get to see everything as it comes in and will generally have first shot. Another advantage is that I have the chance to evaluate a lot of things such as cello pack Proof Sets. I tend to classify them in three ways: nothing special, slam dunk and needs to be considered. This set is a combination of the two latter categories because the obverse is a no doubt Deep Cameo but the reverse needs to be considered and evaluated through the cello.

When I first saw it about 7-10 days ago I set it aside and today I looked at it again and decided to buy it. The obverse is really strong but the reverse is a little less intense, harder to see through the plastic and even harder to photograph. Most 1964 Proof Half-Dollars tend to be evenly frosted on both sides(when they are frosted at all) so my hunch is that it is heavy enough to garner the designation. I wondered what everyone else thinks prior to my cutting it out?? Do you think it has Deep Cameo frost on the reverse?? I will add that the fields appear to be very clean and strongly reflective.

I'll wait a day or so before I cut it free, so let me know what you think and render a grade guess if you want to.

Al H.

GaCoinGuy · July 22, 2015 11:03AM

Obverse will obviously get the designation.....reverse is hard to tell with the picture. From what I see, the fields look clean and hopefully the little bit of haze on the obverse is only on the cello.

Not going to venture a guess on the grade....don't wanna look foolish....

Type2 · July 22, 2015 11:07AM

Looks right AH.

Oh cam no.

TopographicOceans · July 22, 2015 11:11AM

I'd definitely submit it.

But then again, I hold the record for making PR67's

Type2 · July 22, 2015 11:16AM

Al can you get a better pic of the rev and even if it's not a Cam and is a Ascent Hair it is worth the money to send it in.

keets · July 22, 2015 11:19AM

not an accented hair, I ain't that lucky!!

SanctionII · July 22, 2015 11:20AM

Purely from the photo of the OGP set and my many years of searching through flat pack proof sets my assessment is:

1. The half has developed light milky white haze. The haze impairs the quality of the fields and hides their blackness, depth and mirrors. Removing the haze will improve the appearance of the fields. However, the light milky white haze also sits on top of the devices and enhances the appearance of the frost. On silver coins this results in the devices looking more deeply and thickly frosted than they really are. Removing the haze will often worsen (if that is the correct word) the appearance of the fields. Removing the haze will actually allow the coin to be portrayed as it really is, totally nude as it were, without the filmy translucent raiment of light haze hiding the true beauty that hides underneath (talk about waxing poetic, from a lawyer!!!);

2. The reverse central devices, though not well displayed in the photo, display enough "tells" to announce that there exists sufficiently thick frost to warrant at least a CAM designation. The devices located around the rim are much more difficult to analyze and assess. Removal of the reverse haze will also duplicate what is discussed in 1 above; and

3. You need to send the set to me for immediate inspection.

keets · July 22, 2015 11:35AM

Kevin, I don't think it has that haze, though I am well acquainted with the look and have been fooled before. this is more like a DMPL Morgan and how difficult it can be to show the reflective fields complicated by the cello. I once had a really nice 1962 set with what looked like a DCam Nickel. the dilemma was that the coin had a very pretty blue tone washing across the devices on both sides, a bit lighter in the fields. after much contemplation, probably more than a year since I tend to be a slow study, I clipped it free. I reasoned that it would be a Deep Cameo gem after I dipped it.

much to my surprise it was a brilliant coin shortly after it entered the solution, no frost and now no tone!!!

Type2 · July 22, 2015 11:46AM

Let's see how it looks in the nude.

SanctionII · July 22, 2015 11:53AM

Keets.

The same thing has happened to me. Toned and/or frosted looking proofs in OGP can be very tricky and misleading.

Wabbit2313 · July 22, 2015 12:16PM

Dip that sucker and take a new shot of it. Reverse looks no to me right now but that can change quickly when you release and restore her to the wild.

ModCrewman · July 22, 2015 12:54PM

From what I see the obverse has DCAM frost, but it doesn't appear the fields are deep enough to warrant the designation in the current grading room climate at PCGS. I'd offer an identical evaluation of the reverse. That being said I do agree with SanctionII that the coin has a transluscent haze that could be easily removed, though it also looks to be an attractive color if you like the look.

I'm interested to hear your evaluation after setting him free.

lcoopie · July 22, 2015 1:03PM

I don't see cam reverse

Cameonut · July 22, 2015 9:02PM

I am always an optimist on these. As others have said, it is hard to judge when in the cello.

So just cut it out and show us what it looks like.....

I think it has a great shot at dcam based on my experience with this packaging.

keets · July 22, 2015 9:13PM

well, I clipped it out this morning and took a few quick pictures. from a cursory inspection I believe it should grade PF68-69DCAM since I don't see any hairlines or imperfections. as others have said, it can be tricky to judge these when they are in the cello and even after seeing/clipping many there is still no certainty about what the results will be. for me on this one it was if the reverse frost would be heavy enough, I really didn't feel haze/color/film or anything else would be a problem, though I fully understand how that could be suspected in the pictures.

to that end, nothing was done to the coin, no dip/rinse of any kind, only remove and photograph. now it goes in a flip.

ModCrewman · July 22, 2015 9:17PM

That is quite the assessment Al. The picture still causes pause on the reverse fields...clearly the obverse is all there. 68 or 69 DCAM is a lofty grade and I'd expect PCGS to expect it to be all there, I hope your photos are understating the reverse fields.

keets · July 22, 2015 9:23PM

it's glare, the fields are very reflective with that watery look we all love. the area(s) that look suspect are fine when viewed in-hand and the coin is rocked to catch the light at different angles, nothing of concern shows.

sparky64 · July 22, 2015 9:28PM

Boy, that's a looker.

SanctionII · July 22, 2015 10:23PM

Out of the cello there is no haze at all. Mint cello can distort reality.

Gorgeous coin Keets. Congrats on the pick up.

oih82w8 · July 22, 2015 10:36PM

I agree that the OBV looks Cameo, but not the REV.

That is a great looking Kennedy...I would send it to our host for encapsulation.

guitarwes · July 22, 2015 10:57PM

The reverse will hold it back from getting the big boy atty. Nice coin otherwise.

Wabbit2313 · July 22, 2015 11:00PM

Unfortunately, the reverse is not going to make it. In the old days, it might have had a chance but not today. It has to look like this. What a nice obverse though!!

It also looks like there is some haze on the reverse that might improve the look if you gave him a quick bath.

TwoSides2aCoin · July 22, 2015 11:10PM

Top notch obverse. Gorgeous in fact. It has the look of "richness", all day long. Reverse is borderline but possible cameo (in my view). Fantastic coin overall. Looks like it was dipped, post removal from cellophane. Surprise !

keets · July 22, 2015 11:47PM

It has to look like this

really??

Wabbit2313 · July 22, 2015 11:49PM

<< <i>It has to look like this

really?? >>

If you don't want opinions, don't ask for them. It's not going to make DCAM man, sorry.

keets · July 22, 2015 11:56PM

that's fair enough, but the comparison isn't a very good one, that is all I meant. I have tried to explain in prior posts that what some see as weak frost and impaired mirrors that need to be dipped aren't reliable assessments. perhaps it is just that the obverse is so strong or perhaps I am wrong, but in-hand under strong lighting there is NO haze and NO weakness of the reverse frost.

that is all I have tried to say. perhaps your assessment of the picture is better.

Wabbit2313 · July 22, 2015 11:59PM

I just know how hard it is to make these. I have sent in a ton and it has to be painted white by the hand of God to pass these days.

asheland · July 23, 2015 12:19AM

It is indeed a nice looking coin regardless!

guitarwes · July 23, 2015 12:31AM

<< <i>I just know how hard it is to make these. I have sent in a ton and it has to be painted white by the hand of God to pass these days. >>

ricko · July 23, 2015 12:41AM

Really nice coin... I believe it can make CAM-barely, from the pictures, in hand, maybe a definite... 68/69.... Too bad not an AH...Cheers, RickO

segoja · July 23, 2015 12:50AM

Should still make CAM. 68CAM maybe worth $100. With the strong obverse add a tad.

Looks like Al (or someone) dipped the coin....but it is OK

ModCrewman · July 23, 2015 3:02AM

<it's glare, the fields are very reflective with that watery look we all love. the area(s) that look suspect are fine when viewed in-hand and the coin is rocked to catch the light at different angles, nothing of concern shows.>

I take Keets at his word after I challenged the reverse contrast...he has
given me nothing but good advice since I started in this cameo game back in 2011. I must emphasize that he has the coin in hand...we don't.

Here's hoping you get to ring the bell with this one Keets!

djdilliodon · July 23, 2015 4:57AM

From the pics the obverse is deep cam all day long but the reverse looks like cam only. Regardless of what they call it the coin is a nice one!

keets · July 23, 2015 6:49AM

to all the searchers --- how long and how many disappointing sets did it take you to get a good "feel" for what a coin would look like after it came out of the cello?? no doubt we have all missed some real winners. I still have trouble with the Cents.

TopographicOceans · July 23, 2015 7:21AM

My guess is you would do better ATS

SanctionII · July 23, 2015 7:47AM

Keets.

I have no idea how to answer your question with specificity.

All I can say is that my "skill set" in evaluating coins in OGP has increased a fair amount since I returned to the hobby as an adult in mid 1998. I still make mistakes, thinking that a coin is better than it actually is. The reverse is also true and I have had some good fortune in picking out winners from an ocean of run of the mill sets. A recent example me picking out a winner is one of my favorites and it took place earlier this year. I even posted a thread about it.

I was scanning ebay listings and saw a listing for a 1959 proof set in OGP that had photos of the proof set that were not very good. However, my eyes told me that through the cello and under the haze that had developed on the half dollar over the course of 55+ years was a coin with two sided frost and nice mirrored fields. I picked up the set. On delivery I cut out the half, gave it a bath and to my great joy a high grade Cameo emerged. If you have not seen the thread just go the search box and type in "1959". A post bath photo of the coin is contained in the thread and it shows how nice the coin is.

Wish I had more similar stories to tell.

Wabbit2313 · July 23, 2015 8:04AM

The real secret to this thing is find the reverse that you love as DCAM first, then turn it over. It always seems to be the problem.

Every one of those stars and every letter on the reverse needs to be white. Look in the example pic and you will see it.

I fear the Keets coin is not even CAM on the reverse but I am rooting for him.

DIMEMAN · July 23, 2015 8:40AM

I don't collect these and don't know squat about them........but it sure looks nice and I wish Keets the best of luck on grading!

morgansforever · July 23, 2015 9:07AM

Nice looking half, the obverse fields look a bit deeper than the reverse, maybe it's the image.
Beautiful Kennedy regardless of grade.

Cameonut · July 23, 2015 9:07AM

That obverse is to die for - the reverse is clearly weaker, but whether it gets knocked down to cam is up to PCGS.

I also think it will make 68 and I'm happy to see no distracting marks or spots.

Good luck on the submission. I am sure you will let us know how it came out

crazyhounddog · July 23, 2015 9:20AM

Well, you know yourself it's hard to grade from a two dimension image, right? But now that you've thrown some cellophane in there I can't muster a grade. They do look promising, maybe a cameo or two.

johnny9434 · July 24, 2015 5:36AM

nice cello pack. I like

Bodin · November 4, 2015 8:14AM

What was the outcome on this great Kennedy??

keets · November 5, 2015 12:54AM

it hasn't been submitted yet.

What do you think the prospects are for this new cello pack?? Free w/pictures.

Comments

Leave a Comment