Cameo Franklin? Questions on a New Purchase.

[coinman_23885]

Please share your thoughts on the following coin. I know that the services have traditionally rejected coins where the cameo is weak in any area; however, I have seen some, particularly in this date (which appears to be very rare in cameo) certified with less cameo contrast. What are your thoughts? Cameo? Star?

 

 

[Kamillion]

looks cameo to me

[James_OldeTowne]

It looks like a solid "cameo" to me. How much do you want for it?

[WoodenJefferson]

No problem getting ^CAMEO^ the "*" on the other hand cannot be said with an image you can't rotate to dazzle the senses...nice Proof!

[Coindude]

That looks like a super nice coin. The reverse has a bit too much shine IMO and I'll bet in the sellers opinion to get cameo. I'll bet it would get a star. But the fact is, it's extremely hard to grade proofs from photos because it's extremely easy to hide hairlines on a proof coin. I'm pretty sure I know who the seller of this coin is, and he sells pretty much all his coins even the raw ones for exactly what they're worth if not a little more. PM me and I'll tell you who I think the seller is. So, my guess is that the coin would grade as 64*, no cam. The obverse is super thick though, and would probably be called a "MOOSE".

[mkman123]

Very nice.cameo!

[e1cnr]

awesome picture

 

 

the reverse bell may hold it back from cameo

 

 

 

lighting makes frosted proofs difficult to evaluate from pictures

I wouold not be surprised if it came back with any of the possibilities

 

 

some sellers have gotten very good at making coins look like more than they are

 

 

[coinman_23885]

Thanks everyone for your input. I was trying to determine whether to send the coin along with a submission of mine to NGC. Given the comments, I am planning to submit it.

 

It looks like a solid "cameo" to me. How much do you want for it?

 

I'm not looking to sell it at the moment, but if things change, I'll definitely let you know.

 

No problem getting ^CAMEO^ the "*" on the other hand cannot be said with an image you can't rotate to dazzle the senses...nice Proof!

 

Thanks. What I was referring to with the star designation was NGC's practice of awarding a coin that just misses a cameo designation a "*" instead of the cameo designation.

 

 

the reverse bell may hold it back from cameo

 

lighting makes frosted proofs difficult to evaluate from pictures

I wouold not be surprised if it came back with any of the possibilities

 

 

The reverse bell prompted this thread; I was wondering if it would affect the designation. While the images were taken by the seller, I have had the coin in my possession for a week or so, and the photos are fairly accurate.

[coinman_23885]

That looks like a super nice coin. The reverse has a bit too much shine IMO and I'll bet in the sellers opinion to get cameo. I'll bet it would get a star. But the fact is, it's extremely hard to grade proofs from photos because it's extremely easy to hide hairlines on a proof coin. I'm pretty sure I know who the seller of this coin is, and he sells pretty much all his coins even the raw ones for exactly what they're worth if not a little more. PM me and I'll tell you who I think the seller is. So, my guess is that the coin would grade as 64*, no cam. The obverse is super thick though, and would probably be called a "MOOSE".

 

PM sent.

[physics-fan3.14]

The obverse is a no-question Cam, bordering on DCAM. The reverse, at least from these pics, is Cam. However, these pics look to have been taken to to show the most flattering angle, so in hand that could change considereably. So, my assessment from these pics would be CAM with a Star (almost DCAM obverse). As for grade, impossible to tell from those pics.

 

59 is one of the key dates in Cam, as Bobby will tell you. He's trying to put together a set, and having a devil of a time with the Franklin.

[JIM F.]

Here's a link to mine for a comparison.

 

http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/WCM/CoinView.aspx?PeopleSetCoinID=1060169

 

 

[mhomei]

boy oh boy....I like ...and I say it is cameo all day long

[Catbert]

Here is mine if it helps determine what NGC might do:

 

 

Strikethrough mark on reverse below the eagle.

[noow]

I say cameo

[robec1347]

It looks cameo on the obverse for sure. It's tough to gauge the reverse in the image. It could go either way.

 

This year isn't particularly rare in cameo. DCam or Ucam on the other hand is almost non existent with only 10 total at NGC and 19 at PCGS. The Cameo designation totals over 1000 between the two services.

 

NGC PF68 Cam - for comparison purposes

 

[19Lyds]

Please share your thoughts on the following coin. I know that the services have traditionally rejected coins where the cameo is weak in any area; however, I have seen some, particularly in this date (which appears to be very rare in cameo) certified with less cameo contrast. What are your thoughts? Cameo? Star?

 

Is that your photograph or an ebay sellers photograph?

[mkman123]

Hope the seller didn't juice the picture but if it looks like that......it would get cameo I bet

[coinman_23885]

Please share your thoughts on the following coin. I know that the services have traditionally rejected coins where the cameo is weak in any area; however, I have seen some, particularly in this date (which appears to be very rare in cameo) certified with less cameo contrast. What are your thoughts? Cameo? Star?

 

Is that your photograph or an ebay sellers photograph?

 

It is not my photograph; however, I haven't bothered re-imaging it because the photos look fairly accurate to the coin in hand.

[coinman_23885]

Thanks to everyone for the comparison photos, and Calbert, I'm honestly surprised that the coin you posted didn't receive a DCAM/UCAM designation.

[physics-fan3.14]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

[robec1347]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

 

Maybe Tomaska re-polished it before he sold it to me.

[WoodenJefferson]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

 

Maybe Tomaska re-polished it before he sold it to me.

 

I think maybe he meant the dies?

[bsshog40]

Sweet looking Frankie, looks like nice Cameo. As jason stated, these are hard to find. I don't follow the stars too much but it is very nice. Could get one!

[JIM F.]

Sweet looking Frankie, looks like nice Cameo. As jason stated, these are hard to find. I don't follow the stars too much but it is very nice. Could get one!

 

In hand CAM Franklin Proofs are pretty nice...unlike the non-CAMs that are not particularly appealling.

 

The coin from the OP looks CAM for sure on the front...and likely on the back also. If it was purchased from R.T. I would be somewhat suspicious as to way it was raw (that's not meant as a slam, just a concern).

 

Good luck with it.

[physics-fan3.14]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

 

Maybe Tomaska re-polished it before he sold it to me.

 

I think maybe he meant the dies?

 

On proof coins of that era, the cameo wore off very quickly. The mint, knowing that cameo's were much more popular with collectors, would take a wire brush and repolish the devices to restore a cameo effect. These re-polished cameos can be quite attractive, and sometimes even have a stronger cameo effect than the original die did. A repolished cameo is characterized by die polish lines on the devices, as your obverse shows. Sometimes, the die polish is every which way, but the effect is the same - a recreated cameo effect on the die.

[robec1347]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

 

Maybe Tomaska re-polished it before he sold it to me.

 

I think maybe he meant the dies?

 

On proof coins of that era, the cameo wore off very quickly. The mint, knowing that cameo's were much more popular with collectors, would take a wire brush and repolish the devices to restore a cameo effect. These re-polished cameos can be quite attractive, and sometimes even have a stronger cameo effect than the original die did. A repolished cameo is characterized by die polish lines on the devices, as your obverse shows. Sometimes, the die polish is every which way, but the effect is the same - a recreated cameo effect on the die.

 

That would actually make this one a late die state then. The lines are obvious in the photos, not so much in hand.

[physics-fan3.14]

That would actually make this one a late die state then. The lines are obvious in the photos, not so much in hand.

 

DCAM usually lasted for the first dozen or two strikes, CAM lasted only a couple hundred strikes, if that. Depending on when they repolished, I wouldn't exactly call that a late die state.

[lcoopie]

The rev doesn't look cam to me.

[coinman_23885]

Sweet looking Frankie, looks like nice Cameo. As jason stated, these are hard to find. I don't follow the stars too much but it is very nice. Could get one!

 

In hand CAM Franklin Proofs are pretty nice...unlike the non-CAMs that are not particularly appealling.

 

The coin from the OP looks CAM for sure on the front...and likely on the back also. If it was purchased from R.T. I would be somewhat suspicious as to way it was raw (that's not meant as a slam, just a concern).

 

Good luck with it.

 

It wasn't purchased from Rick Tomaska. While I think he has nice material, he usually wants prices which are unrealistic in my opinion. I have only purchased a single coin from him, and it was a proof star coin from the 1950s for $30 or so (from a no reserve auction). The coin I purchased from him looked DCAM/UCAM in hand.

 

[Coindude]

Bob, that looks like a nice re-polished CAM.

I could be mistaken, I'll have to look in my books when I get home, but I believe they quit repolishing dies in the manner you're speaking of around 1955? Again, I could be mistaken. I've seen many repolished die cameos, and most were as good if not superior to the original cameo finish.