More from the Skyman Collection... Russ??
Bruceswar
Posts: 2,869
Ok so I know Russ will like this one. The rest of you will enjoy this one as well.
Proof 68 DCam
Proof 68 DCam
0
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>The fields, especially on the lower reverse, look messy for a 68. It could be on the slab, though. No question on the DCAM. Nice coin. >>
That is on the slab. The coin is really clean.
<< <i>The fields, especially on the lower reverse, look messy for a 68. It could be on the slab, though. No question on the DCAM. Nice coin. >>
The fields are quite clean on this one, for example, what you are seeing between the B and E on Liberty on the obverse is the reflection between the slab and the fields, not some sort of mess. As in all proofs, once you get to this level, the main reason for the 68 versus the 69 are (essentially microscopic) hairlines. There are also 2 very minor milkspots visible with the naked eye on the obverse.
Nice picture Bruce!
EDITED TO ADD: As per Val Webb's book on 1950 to 1964 cameo proofs I have always considered the 1964 Kennedy as kind of an "add-on" to the 1950-63 run of Frankie proofs. When I put my collection together I had Capital plastics create a custom holder that had the whole 1950-64 run. It has always been my philosophy while collecting cameo proof halves of this time frame to get for common date proofs (1956, 1962, 1963, and 1964) absolute killer pr68dcam coins. I'd much rather spend a (couple) hundred extra dollars for an absolute screamer of a pr68dcam that has really nice fields and monster dcam than to go for a pr69dcam. Pr69dcam's always struck me as way too much money for very little difference. I've been collecting cameo Frankies since the late 1980's and truth be told, with my bare eyes, most of the time I can't tell the difference between a 68 and a 69 and even with a loupe I find it questionable at best. I do not feel the need to play that registry game, even though my collection is ranked #17 in the NGC registry (about 1/2 my coins are in NGC plastic).
U.S. Type Set