I wanted one DCAM Franklin for the longest time, so I bought two
airplanenut
Posts: 22,763 ✭✭✭✭✭
These two are newps as far as I only just took their photos, but I guess they're kind of olps, since I got them pushing 2 1/2 years ago. Anyway, while it's a very simple design with minimal intricate details, there's always been something I really like about Franklin half dollars. I have a few mint state examples, but for the longest time I wanted a frosty proof, with the caveat that they're harder to find than one might think for two reasons. First, even in the higher grades, it's not uncommon to see examples with some unsightly haze or significant spotting. To get to the grades where coins look really pristine, they're way out of budget for me. Second, even with no ill intent, it's very easy to make frosty proofs look better than they really are when taking a photo, and for a coin where DCAMs don't reliably have the thick frost of a modern proof, going just by a photo isn't the best setup for success... and I don't get to many shows, nor do I see many examples at the shows I attend.
So I looked and looked and looked, and one day three popped up on the website of a dealer I'd never bought from before. I asked a different dealer (whom I've known for a long time) for a reference, and as it happened, the two were sitting together at a show when my text came in. All three got sent to me so I could make a pick in-hand, and would you know, the least expensive was also the one I liked best (stronger frost and a point lower grade traded against slightly nicer fields). So that's how I got the 1963, which is an NGC PF67UCAM. It has a couple tiny spots, but overall I think it's quite nice for the grade.
...and then less than a week later, I saw the 1962 pop up. It's in an old green label PCGS PR66DCAM holder, and while the fields are not quite as deep as the 1962 (and yes, it has a couple tiny spots, as well), it looked really frosty and nicer than most 67s I'd seen though all my time searching as far as haze and spotting go... and as a 66, it was priced low. So I figured why not and bought it, too.
Itch scratched 
Comments
One of my favorite series. Great design.
I am drawn to thread such as this like a moth to a flame. I do like Ben, especially the frosty kind.
Both of your new coins are stellar. From the photos I like the 63 better than the 62 because the fields on the 63 look more black, watery and deeply mirrored.
If you get the desire to build a Cameo set, try hunting for raw Proof Franklins in OGP or aftermarket holders. Sometimes you will find Cameo examples for modest money.
Love the 63, its all good 👍
Congrats. You have been scratching a few itches recently. The 63 looks very nice. Neat story on the acquisition.
don't tell anyone when you've scratched the 1933 DE itch
Like the one I lost in a boating accident along with my 64-D dollar?
I’ve held two of them. Itch scratched 🙂
Besides, if I had that money, I’d buy a high relief, a bunch of other cool coins, and an airplane.
100% the 1963 is the superior example. The 1962 is very nice, and for how inexpensive it was, it was a why not. If it had been an unattractive example I’d have seen no need for a duplicate type just to have a second coin, but it is a piece I also genuinely enjoy. I don’t see myself putting together a full set (I really just stick to type), but if an uber frosty example ever came along at the right price, I could always get another.
Nice! That 63 is clean. I have a couple of CAM Frankies in my collection, but no DCAM.
1962 in DCAM66 is my only one. Congrats on 2 good looking coins.
Beautiful proofs. Do you have any tips on imaging these?
Wait 2 1/2 years because you don't really want to?
In all seriousness, these were easy and difficult to photograph. Easy because frosty proofs without toning require just some basic changes to light positioning to get the look you're after. Difficult because the slabs had some scuffs, and most of the light angles that did well to show the coin also accentuated the marks on the holder (which look more like hairlines/stray marks on proofs than they would for an uncirculated coin), so almost all the time I spent was playing around until I got those marks to be as minimal as possible. That's the real reason I put off the photos for so long... I couldn't get past them quickly when I first got the coins, so I set the coins aside. Just recently I pulled them out again and remembered I didn't have photos, so I shot them again, but this time taking the time needed to get the photos I was after.
Thanks!
Wh buy one when you can get 2 for twice the price 👍
…which is not what I did
They are addictive. I wanted to be build a DCAM set at one point, but I don't see me paying $40k-$60k to get a DCAM 1950.