Three Day GTG - Coin #13 Ends 9-6 - REVEALED 68+DCAM
Comments
-
PF66 DCAM
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
0 -
PF 66CAM
0 -
Pr67cam
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
1 -
-
PF65DCAM
0 -
Even though I know better than to guess the grade of a Proof coin from images, I’ll play - PR 67 Cameo.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
1 -
PR67CAM
1 -
PR 68 Cam
You only live life once, enjoy it like it's your last day. It just MIGHT be!
0 -
PF67CAM
1 -
67 CAM
Proud follower of Christ! I love the USA! Land of the Bright and Beautiful! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
2 -
Nice coin.
Looking closely at the photo I see fields which are impaired (very common on 1956 Type 2 proof halves) and are not deeply mirrored, smooth, watery black in appearance.
Based upon my first hand experience in submitting frosty proof Franklins to our host for grading I will opine that the pictured coin graded PF67.
In 2024 this 1956 Type 2 proof half dollar of mine graded PF67. The fields on this coin are better than the fields on the OP's coin.
In 2024 this one of mine graded PF68.
l
0 -
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCam
Collector, occasional seller
1 -
PF65
If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.
Tommy
0 -
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
2 -
-
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
2 -
First thought: PR67 dcam.
1 -
PR67 Cameo
1 -
PR67DCAM
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled0 -
I know this doesn’t qualify in PCGS world, but this is what an NGC 1956 Ty. 2 Proof 68 CAM looks like.
3 -
PF 67 CAM
1 -
PR67CAM
Collector of Capped Bust Halves, SLQ's, Commems, and random cool stuff! @davidv_numismatics on Instagram
1 -
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “During an earlier one of these GTG threads, the 1880 proof quarter, I looked at the CoinFacts entries for CAM vs DCAM and proofs of that year seem to have minimal frost, meaning that the difference in designation lies in the fields. I know you mentioned the time frame of 1950 to 1970 but I wanted to make sure you weren't referring to all proof coins.
CAM from CoinFacts:
DCAM from CoinFacts:
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled0 -
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “I have bolded the key point above. If the fields aren't deeply mirrored you cannot have "heavy contrast". Hence- the fields hold it back from DCAM.
Collector, occasional seller
0 -
As Mark @MFeld suggests, grading Proofs from images is a venerable crapshoot
In other words, "Another Proof? Alex, please! STOP!!"
Also, I'm waffling on the designation. It might NOT have one.
PF67 CAM
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #2421 -
@pursuitofliberty said:
Also, I'm waffling on the designation. It might NOT have one.The frost is strong. Why wouldn't it have a designation?
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled0 -
@hummingbird_coins said:
@pursuitofliberty said:
Also, I'm waffling on the designation. It might NOT have one.The frost is strong. Why wouldn't it have a designation?
.
Disclaimer, I do not collect or have these kind of coins graded, but based on what I know I do not think it's a DCAM.That said, I see a fair amount of small frost breaks and frost fading which lead me to believe it could be a liner for the CAM designation. I am not 100% sure where PCGS draws that line.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #2421 -
Frosted devices, even frost of DCAM quality, does not by itself mean a coin warrants a CAM or a DCAM designation.
The fields must also be of high quality, with a mirrored, watery, black appearance.
0 -
@SanctionII said:
Frosted devices, even frost of DCAM quality, does not by itself mean a coin warrants a CAM or a DCAM designation.The fields must also be of high quality, with a mirrored, watery, black appearance.
I don’t know how you define “high quality”. But according to the PCGS population report there are approximately 1400 Proof Franklin half dollars graded 64 and lower that received the Cameo designation and nearly 200 others, Deep Cameo.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
0 -
@ChrisH821 said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “I have bolded the key point above. If the fields aren't deeply mirrored you cannot have "heavy contrast". Hence- the fields hold it back from DCAM.
Perhaps you can determine from images how deep the mirrors are on a Proof coin but I usually can’t. Still, nothing in the images provided tells me that the fields (as opposed to the degree of frost) would necessarily hold this coin back from the DCAM designation.
Based on the coins I’ve seen, if the frost is strong enough, the depth of the mirror's doesn’t typically preclude the DCAM designation. I’ve even seen a small number of darkly toned type coins (with unimpressive mirrors) that received the designation.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
2 -
@MFeld said:
@ChrisH821 said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “I have bolded the key point above. If the fields aren't deeply mirrored you cannot have "heavy contrast". Hence- the fields hold it back from DCAM.
Perhaps you can determine from images how deep the mirrors are on a Proof coin but I usually can’t. Still, nothing in the images provided tells me that the fields (as opposed to the degree of frost) would necessarily hold this coin back from the DCAM designation.
Based on the coins I’ve seen, if the frost is strong enough, the depth of the mirror's doesn’t typically preclude the DCAM designation. I’ve even seen a small number of darkly toned type coins (with unimpressive mirrors) that received the designation.
The visible flow lines, at least in my experience, are not typical of a DCAM franklin. You've surely seen way more than I have though.
Didn't you also guess PR67 CAM? What do you think is holding this back from DCAM?Collector, occasional seller
0 -
@ChrisH821 said:
@MFeld said:
@ChrisH821 said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
@ChrisH821 said:
PR67 Cam. Fields hold it back from DCamOn a proof coin I dont think the fields determine CAM or DCAM.
Agreed - it’s a matter of frost and contrast, not depth of reflectivity. As per PCGS:
“Surface - Deep Cameo
Deep Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices.Surface - Cameo
Cameo
1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - The obverse and reverse must exhibit devices that are at least lightly frosted and create a contrast with the fields. Frostiness on the devices may be heavier yet contain areas where the frost is lacking or brilliance is evident. - A coin that exhibits Deep Cameo attributes on one side and Cameo attributes on the other side is considered only a Cameo. “I have bolded the key point above. If the fields aren't deeply mirrored you cannot have "heavy contrast". Hence- the fields hold it back from DCAM.
Perhaps you can determine from images how deep the mirrors are on a Proof coin but I usually can’t. Still, nothing in the images provided tells me that the fields (as opposed to the degree of frost) would necessarily hold this coin back from the DCAM designation.
Based on the coins I’ve seen, if the frost is strong enough, the depth of the mirror's doesn’t typically preclude the DCAM designation. I’ve even seen a small number of darkly toned type coins (with unimpressive mirrors) that received the designation.
The visible flow lines, at least in my experience, are not typical of a DCAM franklin. You've surely seen way more than I have though.
Didn't you also guess PR67 CAM? What do you think is holding this back from DCAM?I just don’t think the frost is intense enough for a deserved DCAM. However, trying to be open-minded on this subject… maybe in some instances when I think the frost is insufficient for a DCAM, it’s actually a matter of the mirrors not appearing strong enough, but that’s only registering on a subconscious level.
So the next few times I’m looking at Proofs in hand, trying to arrive at an opinion regarding a possible DCAM designation I’ll focus more on the depth of the mirrors and see where that takes me. Thank you for your participation and comments.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
2 -
Some fascinating discussion here.
I'll try to remain impartial as I provide some input.
PCGS DCAM standard: "1950-1970 Proof Coinage: - Heavily frosted devices on both the obverse and reverse, with no areas of the main devices unfrosted. - Heavy contrast between the fields and devices."
NGC DCAM standard: "Applies only to PF coins. The fields are deeply mirrored and the devices are heavily frosted for bold contrast on both sides of the coin."
CACG DCAM standard: "Full mint frost on both obverse and reverse throughout all devices with no areas of dark shadowing as the coin is pulled in and out of the light."
I doubt that CACG goes off of frost alone, and rather adopts the "contrast" standard of the other two services. This requires the mirrors to live up to a certain standard as well (and is why the "black" mirrors of early die state coins are often the ones in DCAM rather than CAM holders). The 1880 Proof quarters posted earlier are a great example of this IMO.
1 -
Mark.
My use of the term high quality is limited to whether a coin receives a CAM or DCAM designation. it does not extend to the numerical grade assigned to a coin. Marks, hairlines, etc. present on a coin lowers the numerical grade yet the coin can still receive the designation.
At the end of the day the subjective nature of grading results in coins receiving a designation which most people think should not receive it; and vice versa.
This subjectivity is part of the hobby and does make participation in the hobby interesting, frustrating and exhilarating at the same time.
2 -
@SanctionII said:
Mark.My use of the term high quality is limited to whether a coin receives a CAM or DCAM designation. it does not extend to the numerical grade assigned to a coin. Marks, hairlines, etc. present on a coin lowers the numerical grade yet the coin can still receive the designation.
At the end of the day the subjective nature of grading results in coins receiving a designation which most people think should not receive it; and vice versa.
This subjectivity is part of the hobby and does make participation in the hobby interesting, frustrating and exhilarating at the same time.
Thank you and well said.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
1 -
67CAM
1 -
PR 67CAM
0 -
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMSuccessful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
0 -
@gumby1234 said:
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMI don’t think the “CAM” designation is awarded for “MS” coins by either PCGS or NGC.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
2 -
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMI don’t think the “CAM” designation is awarded for “MS” coins by either PCGS or NGC.😉
Weren't a few 65-67 SMS coins graded as MS grades with a cam before they switched to SP?
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
0 -
Proof-67 Cameo
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
0 -
@privatecoin said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMI don’t think the “CAM” designation is awarded for “MS” coins by either PCGS or NGC.😉
Weren't a few 65-67 SMS coins graded as MS grades with a cam before they switched to SP?
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
0 -
@privatecoin said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMI don’t think the “CAM” designation is awarded for “MS” coins by either PCGS or NGC.😉
Weren't a few 65-67 SMS coins graded as MS grades with a cam before they switched to SP?
>
I’m not aware of any coins that were labeled as “MS” and “Cameo” without the inclusion of “SP”, “SMS” (or something similar) none of which apply here.Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
1 -
@MFeld said:
@privatecoin said:
@MFeld said:
@gumby1234 said:
Upon closer examination of the coin. It appears that the frost may be too weak on the right side of the headstock. So I want to change my guess to
MS66 CAMI don’t think the “CAM” designation is awarded for “MS” coins by either PCGS or NGC.😉
Weren't a few 65-67 SMS coins graded as MS grades with a cam before they switched to SP?
>
I’m not aware of any coins that were labeled as “MS” and “Cameo” without the inclusion of “SP”, “SMS” (or something similar) none of which apply here.fax
Proud follower of Christ! I love the USA! Land of the Bright and Beautiful! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
0 -
-
Very surprised.
faxProud follower of Christ! I love the USA! Land of the Bright and Beautiful! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
2 -
@pcgsregistrycollector said:
Very surprised.
faxI'm shocked with a lot of the grades.
It's a Type 2 '56, not a '59. They come in DCAM, and they look like this.
1 -
@FlyingAl said:
@pcgsregistrycollector said:
Very surprised.
faxI'm shocked with a lot of the grades.
It's a Type 2 '56, not a '59. They come in DCAM, and they look like this.
I guess you are right. I took some time today to look at past auction pictures on HA and Greatcollections and a lot of them look like this.
Proud follower of Christ! I love the USA! Land of the Bright and Beautiful! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
2
Leave a Comment
Categories
- All Categories
- 520.1K Coins and Currency - PCGS
- 328.6K U.S. Coin Forum
- 14.8K PCGS Set Registry Forum
- 5.2K Q & A Forum
- 41.4K World & Ancient Coins Forum
- 3K U.S. & World Currency Forum
- 96.4K Buy, Sell, & Trade - U.S. Coins
- 7.3K Buy, Sell & Trade - World & Ancient Coins
- 1.5K Buy, Sell & Trade - Currency
- 61 Random
- 246.2K Trading Cards, Autographs and Memorabilia - PSA
- 90.3K Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
- 1.7K Autographs Forum
- 16.4K PSA Set Registry Forum
- 22K Sports Talk
- 115K Buy, Sell & Trade - Cards & Memorabilia
- 663 Buy, Sell & Trade - Autographs
- 2.2K Stamps
- 1.5K Stamps Forum
- 670 Buy, Sell & Trade - Stamps
- 83 Coin Shows
- 83 General Coin Show Information and Discussion
- 11.9K Misc
- 11.9K Testing Forum