1953 Proof Cent, is it a DCAM?
SanctionII
Posts: 12,618 ✭✭✭✭✭
Stopped by a local shop today and picked up a 1953 proof set in OGP because of the cent. Your thoughts.
3
Comments
Man...it's close..the obverse haze might hold it back..,.are you brave enough to get rid of it?
mannie gray.
I do not know.
Removing haze from copper is a huge gamble.
There is light haze on both sides of the coin laying on top of pristine, deep mirrored fields. The photos were taken by my phone and do not show the coin very well, especially the obverse. In hand, under good lighting conditions both sides of the coin just jump out at you. The devices are thickly frosted and the fields are deeply mirrored. The contrast between the devices and fields is fantastic.
Great contrast on that one Kevin. Wish mine were as strong for that date. From my experience, I don't think you'll get DCAM with those fields. Don't know if I'd be brave enough to visit it with some MS70 or not. I think I'd be inclined to leave it alone as the contrast looks strong enough to get a CAM designation, and I'm not sure you'd make DCAM even after a cleansing.
Yes...I agree...removing haze from copper is dicey.
It'll either be a screaming gem............or you'll ruin it.
Ooh, that's nice.
The haze may hold it back from a DCAM, but it's certainly a CAM. Worth a shot at our hosts, IMO.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
It is very nice
That's something I'll never understand. This is not a troll joke and begs an answer.
So if I have a Proof Lincoln dated 2017 with a DCAM contrast just as most are and it gets a definite haze over its surface it is no longer a DCAM right? Now, suppose I have the OP's DCAM 1953 cent? These don't all come DCAM. What now?
Kevin, send it to either PCGS or NGC and ask them to conserve the coin.
Sell it to me instead.
Photo cropping is your friend
No harassing @SanctionII on his images...it took him like 15 years of being on the forum to post his first picture. We take what we can get!
Another good thing about the proof set is that the nickel is also high grade and likely a Cameo.
I agree with Keets - send it in for conservation.
As far as dcam goes, I think it would have a good shot if it cleans up nicely.
Also check for the doubled die - the tail of the 9 in the date is very thick. The photo suggests that it might be the DDO.
Somewhere I have an NGC ultracam DDO for this date. Not sure if I have pics or not. If I find pics to post, I will.
Anyway, a nice find!
“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!
wow, nice
BHNC #203
Great find. Agree it needs sent in
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Very nice cent.... looks as if it could go DCAM....It may be worth a shot at a PCGS conserve as recommended above....hard to say without it in hand... you could send it in as is...if it comes back CAM.. try going the conserve route....Cheers, RickO
as posted based only on the pictures I would say 65DCAM.
The. Cent is much nicer than my previous best 53 cent. The new cent has thicker frost and deep mirrored fields. The new cent now resides in my best 53 proof set.
If that cent is 'conserved,' I'd unload it the day you get it back from the TPG. I wouldn't mess with copper.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
do acetone baths work on coppers?
Yes' however it must be fresh, virgin, never used and you will run the risk of leaving a pattern of "flowing haze" around the relief.
Conserve it yourself:
Dip it in a 10-20% solution of MS70 / distilled water, then rinse it with near boiling hot distilled water. It will work wonders on that coin.
I am not criticizing anyone’s opinion and I am among the least experienced here at grading or “conserving”, but I wonder how we got to a place where we have to dip a coin to get it marketable and then we need to sell it before it turns bad.
I have heard horror stories of people who bought a clean coin only to see it “turn” later on due to a bad dip job. Our “perfect” (or nearly so) coins are only fleeting it seems. Today’s blast white (or red) coins may actually be ticking time bombs.
I am probably just uneducated on the subject, but won’t “haze” possibly turn into something more desirable down the road? Is it a stop on the road to interesting toning, or is it a detour to definite disaster?
never ever dip copper!
There are a number of thing on the market that can be used to remove haze from copper.
I may wrong but I believe acetone will affect copper. (JMHO)
Also only the obv needs to be cameo not the rev.
Yes, DCAM.
To me, if it left the dies with the attributes of a DCAM, it is, whether it has haze or not, unless someone alters the surfaces of the coin.
AMEN! However, from what I've read lately, I think you and I are going to be in the minority.
Unlike most proof cent fron 36-58 that have frosted obverse devices and reverse devices that, while frosted, do not show much contrast, my new 53 cent has heavily frosted reverse devices the provide excellent contrast with the mirrored fields.
In hand the coin just glows.
Kevin, while PCGS was late coming to the table with conservation they have done so for longer than advertised. I believe that both NGC and PCGS don't just perform conservation on a coin that you send in, they will first examine it and then take appropriate steps. I have never used the service at PCGS but if you choose to go that route I'm sure you could talk in advance to someone in that department.
Thanks Keets.
A little ancient and generally unknown history...Coin conservation was practiced at the ANA's Certification Service in DC in the early 1970's. I don't have time to relate some of the stories I heard. If I remember, ANA added a statement to the submission form that it was OK to remove crud so a coin could be authenticated.
Attached are photos of my previous best 53 cent (Modcrewman asked me to provide a photo of same). It is nice, but does not have the thick frost the new cent does. It also has a carbon spot on one of the wheat stalks on the reverse.
I'm pretty sure both of your 1953 cents have better contrast than my best '53 cent that is a 66 CAM.
If you go the conservation route, I can 100% recommend PCGS' conservation services. I've had the conservation team work on dozens of my coins thus far and they have done a fantastic job.
NGC/NCS, on the other hand, conserved a coin with toning without my consent, because in their standard submission form's fine print they have ultimate authority to conserve coins at their own will, without asking. It's really stupid, in my opinion, and it made me rather unhappy.
If those are breaks in the cameo surface on the cheek, eye and hairline (and not just a photography issue), then no, I think it will only become a cameo coin. It definitely needs to be conserved. I'd do it myself if it were my coin, but I'm frugal.
DollarAfterDollar.
I read your reply and looked at the coin again, under a 10x loupe. There are no breaks in the frost on the cheek, eye, hairline or other devices. What you are seeing is in the photo only.
I would suggest removing the haze on both coins, then submit both to PCGS.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.