Care to grade?

[SPeck95512]

This was an NCS Conservation Showcase some time ago and is a beautiful coin. It has the cameo but doesn't show in the lighting. Anyone care to hazard a guess?

 

 

 

I plan on submitting to PCGS for crossover as I'm more of a PCGS guy but it currently resides in an NGC holder.

[michael]

66 because of the fly specks

[James_OldeTowne]

It looks like a doubled-die?

 

I'll guess 64 just because of the ding on the torch, along with tiny spots.

[cpm9ball]

It looks like a doubled-die?

 

Are you referring to the profile? I think so, too!

 

Chris

[BillJones]

I'd say MS-64 because of the spots and the light marks in front of Roosevelt's ear and at the the bottom of the torch.

 

Personally I can't think of any good reason to send this to PCGS. You will probably be disappointed with the results.

[SPeck95512]

The appearance of doubling on the profile is a play of the light. There is no doubling on the coin, not even strike doubling that plagues the SMS series.

[SPeck95512]

http://s1218.photobucket.com/albums/dd401/SPeck95512/?action=view&current=DSC02929.jpg

 

http://s1218.photobucket.com/albums/dd401/SPeck95512/?action=view&current=DSC02931.jpg

 

Some more pictures of the coin

[grade it-migration]

68 because it is a 66

 

Just looked at the grade after the above post

 

If that is a 65..... WOW do I have some junk in 65 66 67 holders.

[coinman_23885]

Grade it, the date is a 1965; he hasn't formally published the grade.

 

I think the coin is SMS 66, and I don't see the cameo contrast.

[Walkerfan]

I'll say MS 65--just because.

[James_OldeTowne]

It looks like a doubled-die?

 

I'll guess 64 just because of the ding on the torch, along with tiny spots.

It looks better in the additional images, and could well be 65 or higher.

[SPeck95512]

It got SMS 67 w/o the cameo designation and that made me ask what they were smoking when they left off the desig. With the coin in hand it's obviously a cameo I just can't get a good picture of it.

[James_OldeTowne]

It got SMS 67 w/o the cameo designation and that made me ask what they were smoking when they left off the desig. With the coin in hand it's obviously a cameo I just can't get a good picture of it.

It could be a "net grade up", then. In other words, they didn't want to stick their neck out on a very rare "cam", so instead, they gave you a couple of extra grading points as meager compensation.

 

In other words, maybe it's really a "65 cam" in a "67 non-cam" holder.

[grade it-migration]

Cameo Proof: A proof coin that displays a frosted looking, milky-white surface to all, or most raised portions of the design. To qualify as a Cameo both the obverse and reverse must exhibit main devices which are clearly frosted and create a contrast between fields and devices. The majority of pre-1936 U.S. brilliant proof coins have Cameo devices. Cameo proofs for 1950 to 1970 are much rarer than non-cameos. PCGS designates cameo 1950 to 1970 proof coins as "CA".

 

http://www.pcgs.com/articles/article_view.chtml?artid=22&universeid=313&type=1

[SPeck95512]

O...K...

 

p.s. I like the Voltair quote for your sig grade it

[Coindude]

Here's a link to pics of my SMS cameos at NGC.

 

And, a link to my registry set of SMS cameos at PCGS:

 

Take a look at those and see how they compare. The pictures are very much true to life.

 

And on another note, NGC has been extremely tough lately on cameos.

 

I had an extra 65 dime in cameo, but sold it last year, it was a 66 cameo, and I upgraded to 67 cameo.