Scratching my head. Do these '54's appear cameo to you?

[SkyMan]

I'm normally pretty good with figuring out what will cameo and what will not. I got a nice raw (put together) 1954 proof set several months back. I sent in the Franklin, the Washington and the Roosevelt, figuring at least 2 out of the 3 would cameo. I recently got the coins back from PCGS and only the Washington Cameo'd. I'm certainly not going to slit my belly or anything, but I do wonder what they are looking for. In any case, they are pretty coins. They were graded; Franklin PR66, Washington PR66CAM, and Roosevelt PR67. The images were done by Bob Campbell and I think he did an excellent job.

 

(The nose on the Franklin is frosted, it's just the light angle that makes it appear otherwise).

 

 

[michael]

they all look cam from the photos to my minds eye

 

not super deep or killer cameo but definately they make cameo from the photos

[robec1347]

After seeing these in hand, I have to agree with Sy and also michael. None are super deep, but to me, cameo none the less. All are very pleasing coins.

[physics-fan3.14]

They look cameo to me. The dime is borderline, but the half looks like it should have made it. Try submitting to NGC. They have a reputation for being a little easier to get Cameo, and if they don't CAM there then they will almost definitely get a *

[WoodenJefferson]

Now, don't get all bent out of shape, I paid $45 a ticket to see Ray in Vegas and

he put on one heck of a show, rest his soul.

 

In my minds eye, they are cameo, I don't know what criteria PCGS used to negate that designation,

must be something going on there the graders did not give nod to...but what?

[bsshog40]

I tend to agree here with these being at least cameo. The Obv on both the half and the dime look like they may not be totally frosted going by the pics, but as you mention the nose on frankie being frosted and not looking it, could just be the pics. Deep cameo would be another story so I really don't see why they didn't make Cameo. Nice coins Sy!

[physics-fan3.14]

I tend to agree here with these being at least cameo. The Obv on both the half and the dime look like they may not be totally frosted going by the pics, but as you mention the nose on frankie being frosted and not looking it, could just be the pics. Deep cameo would be another story so I really don't see why they didn't make Cameo. Nice coins Sy!

 

Especially on the cameo coins of the early 50's, frost breaks in certain areas are acceptable on certain dies. These dies just never received the frost in these areas, and even the DCAM specimens will show breaks. I'm not sure which die Sy's Frankie came from, or the characteristics of it. For more, including many pictures, I recommend Tomaska's other book "Cameo Proof Coinage of the 1950 to 1970 era." Tomaska was one of the people that helped get Cam and D/Ucam recognized at the TPGs.

[bsshog40]

Thanks Physics!

[jackson64]

I think everyone has hit on it..physics and Bobby made excellent points..it appears as if the Franklin obv has a few small spots/voids that would disqualify it by PCGS standards...NGC would at least give it a * due to the nice reverse, I believe it may very well Cam at NGC for both sides

[Coindude]

Looked at the pics, read the comments, then went back and read the grades.

 

I agree with the grades on the half and the quarter but not the dime.

 

The half has what I call "too much shine" on the obverse. The reverse borders on ultra cameo.

 

The quarter is just a solid example of a cameo.

 

The dime, well, you got absolutely ripped there... I would think the fact it is a high grade keeps it from being a cameo. What? You mean that because it's a higher grade it should exhibit more than normal cameo contrast? Well, it shouldn't, but I've seen that happen a lot. So, yea, at 67/68/69, the frost must be really nice... but the frost is... maybe you should resub that one, but I wouldn't bother with the half.

[robec1347]

Here are a few more pics of the Half and Dime obverse.

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Hmm. Now I'm not so sure that the Frankie should have gotten cameo. You just made it more difficult Bob (although the pics are all superb). And it just goes to show, yet again, that pictures are a poor replacement for actually examining in hand.

[SkyMan]

Just as a heads up, IMO the 25c was a lock cameo, the 10c should be a cameo (IMO the obverse is a cameo/cameo- and the reverse is DCAM-), and the 50c had a serious shot (over 66%) at cameoing. For what it is worth, the dime is actually the toughest of the 3 to find as a cameo.

[rrantique]

Nice cams Sy. (thumbs u

[bsshog40]

With the new pics I will agree more that the dime should have been Cameo but I'm still not sure about the half there Sy. It just looks to have more luster than it does frost. As physics stated, much better to be able to tell in-hand. Bob does a great job of imaging but I'm sure it's hard to get the perfect pic when your dealing with coins soo close to the edge of designation. JMO

[Coin]

They all look Cameo to me ( in the pics) . Not exactly Superb/Ultra/deep , but still Cameo. I think the TPGs get a little nit-picky about giving out the designations , though.

For personal reasons , I would bet that they would have gotten at least a Cameo designation if they were from the years '65 , '66 , '67 from SMSets ( yes I know they are 54's and not SMS).

I have several from the SMSets from each year with less Cameo , even places within the Cameos that were reflective , from both the 2 main TPGs that were 'awarded' the designations.

 

The criteria for the designation of Cameo from the big two seems to be tough , huh?

[coinman1794]

They should have gotten Cameo, at least if you use other PCGS/NGC coins as a reference point for what the designation calls for. The problem is the graders are not consistent. 1954 is the last Franklin half minted before quality standards improved dramatically (in 1955), and "modern" proof coinage began to emerge. If the fields are completely mirrored and the devices are snowy, though not necesarily heavily frosted, a cameo designation is in order on coins 1954 and before. Both grading services have been overly harsh on designations in the past 6-8 months, and I have had numerous Cameo, Ultra, PL, and DPL coins miss the designation, or loose the designation upon regrade. Send them back if they apear to be Cameo!

 

I think your aditional photos are misleading; often these early proofs will look glossy over the high points at certain angles, and all but 1 of your pics show a frosted cameo finish. There is not way to be certain about these particular coins without actually seeing them, but they appear to be Cameo from here.

[robec1347]

I was not intending to mislead anyone when I took these images. I took anywhere between 15-20 images of each side, moving the light position and the coin for each shot. Many images had similar appearances, but quite a few also exhibited different looks. I could have kept going, but I'm pretty certain the results wouldn't have resulted in any dramatic differences. That is the difficulty in trying to show a 3-D object in a 2-D world. As many have said, nothing takes the place of actually seeing the coin in hand. I do know they are lovely coins, each with a more than even chance of the cameo designation. To me, the Roosevelt was a slam dunk while the Franklin, though not a monster cameo, is still deserving of a cameo designation.

[bsshog40]

I was not intending to mislead anyone when I took these images. I took anywhere between 15-20 images of each side, moving the light position and the coin for each shot. Many images had similar appearances, but quite a few also exhibited different looks. I could have kept going, but I'm pretty certain the results wouldn't have resulted in any dramatic differences. That is the difficulty in trying to show a 3-D object in a 2-D world. As many have said, nothing takes the place of actually seeing the coin in hand. I do know they are lovely coins, each with a more than even chance of the cameo designation. To me, the Roosevelt was a slam dunk while the Franklin, though not a monster cameo, is still deserving of a cameo designation.

Bob, I have seen many of your pictures of coins and all are of great quality. I know for certain you would never try to mis-lead anyone with your pics. As stated, in-hand is a much better representation when the slightest difference of appearance can change the overall looks of any coin.