Does this Ultra Cam even look cam to anyone?

mnmcoin · August 19, 2002 11:23AM

Yikes...

1952 Half NGC 66UCAM

morris <><

jakemrjr · August 19, 2002 11:26AM

seems to be way too many breaks in the frost.

airplanenut · August 19, 2002 11:28AM

While it appears to be broken, the entire image looks like it is very dark... if light doesn't hit a coin at a perfect angle (seen on modern proofs) it may not show any contrast, just the mirrors- my guess is this coin was taken with low light coming from a bad angle... I trust NGC not to goof up on something that would be so obvious.

Placid · August 19, 2002 11:29AM

Smellytrade has poor pictures.

Russ · August 19, 2002 11:32AM

It really depends on whose definition of CAM one chooses to use. I doubt it meets PCGS's definition, which is something like "Black Hole Mirrors, Super Nova Devices" and maybe we'll bless you with the designation.

Russ, NCNE

LanLord · August 20, 2002 12:55AM

Lighting can be a funny thing in coin images. That coin could be really flashy, but with the wrong person doing the image it would look pretty poor (as is the case). I think this is one you would really need to hold to get a better feeling about.

CarlWohlforth · August 20, 2002 1:01AM

The reverse seems weakly frosted at the corners of the bell at the very least. The obverse looks even and deeply frosted to me. So I'd say yes it does look Cameo to me.

1956Quarter · August 20, 2002 1:22AM

One thing for sure it certainly looks scratched like someone was rubbing it with a cloth. Good date to have in the Frankie Proofs, but the quality is lacking.

Does this Ultra Cam even look cam to anyone?

Comments

Leave a Comment