Philosophical question

[Weidel Legacy Collection]

Let's say that I have a coin graded as Proof-68 Cameo. Would you consider the same date coin in Proof-67 Ultra (or Deep) Cameo to be an upgrade over the first? How about if it was in Proof-66 Ultra Cameo?

[John Maben]

RWW--

 

My opinion, I think most would answer that question ultimately on the values of each. In other words, if the 67UC was worth more than the 68CA, then yes, most would consider it an upgrade.

 

John

[Wihlborg]

Personally, I would not. I believe you have to compare apples to apples (Proof-68 whatever vs. Proof-68 whatever) and not apples to oranges (Proof-68 whatever vs. Proof-67 whatever), but I guess it would depend upon what is more important to the individual collector, Grade or the degree of the cameo designation.

 

John

[XpipedreamR]

Hmmm...this question sounds familiar

 

 

A) I look at cameos and brilliant proofs as two different animals. I don't feel that cameo is the quintessence of proofhood.

 

B) Speaking strictly about cameos...I guess you could get a 67 that looks as good as a 68, for example, and if it has much more contrast, then I suppose I would go for it. I don't think I would go down too far, though, like to 65, in order to get more contrast. I would have to judge with the coins in hand, whether I felt it was an "upgrade." The value of the respective coins would be irrelevant to me in terms of considering it an upgrade or not.

What I would probably really do is get them all...I would have my higher grade with lesser cameo, and then a lower grade with monster cameo just to have an example of that type.

[TomB]

In my opinion, I would think the coin with the greater eye appeal would be the coin that would be the better piece, regardless of grade or designation.

[Wihlborg]

John,

 

No fair bringing ‘value’ into the discussion.

 

You are of course probably right in your assessment, as so much of what collectors ‘value’ in this hobby is directly tied into how much it is ‘worth’.

 

John

[John Maben]

In the "purest" sense, looking at numbers only, 67 is less than 68. In the practical sense, and from a marketplace perspective, the grade/designation combination that is worth more, will be the upgrade. Which would you rather have for collection assuming you could only choose one; the coin with the higher grade, or the coin with the lower grade that is worth more because it is designated Ultra?

[Wihlborg]

John,

 

I understand fully what you are saying, but I guess the point I am trying to make is that there is a difference between ‘Value’ and ‘Worth’. IMO there are a lot of wonderful coins that are overlooked by many collectors because they lack some designation or are not ‘worth’ as much as another coin for whatever reason.

 

John

[John Maben]

Point well taken.

[Weidel Legacy Collection]

Thanks for all the responses. I posed this question on both this board and the PCGS one to see what folks opinions are.

 

I have to admit that I am rather hooked on the degree of frostiness and mirror depth that leads to a proof coin being termed a substantial (deep/ultra/whatever) cameo. The population numbers are a 'somewhat' useful indicator of the relative scarcity of deep cameo proof coins and I take them into account when determining if a step backward in grade but forward in designation makes sense for my collection.

 

But, the final decision is based on the look of the coin - it has to be superior to what I already have for me to make this kind of 'upgrade'.

[airplanenut]

In my opinion, I would think the coin with the greater eye appeal would be the coin that would be the better piece, regardless of grade or designation.

I like Tom's answer. Since sometimes the line between a 68 and 67 is a visable hairline, the 68 may really be nicer. Sometimes, though, I can't see the difference, in which case, bring out the frost!

 

On a tangent, how about a NGC PF61 Franklin I saw last month at a show? That thing had hairlines that look like a rake went across the coin

[Dermott]

I'd have to go with the traditional (non)-answer of that it depends on which one looks better overall.

 

Maybe the 67 has a blemish that's overly distracting in a prime spot that your eyes keep looking at in disgust, or maybe it just has a few smaller ones that aren't that noticible. Maybe one has better toning (or lack of) than the other.

 

Kind of hard to make a real decision without two coins designated as per the example to look at, so the best answer is to pick the one that YOU the individual thinks is the better coin.

 

If you're thinking in just a money/score mindset, then John is of course correct, but if you're looking for personal enjoyment it becomes a much harder question to answer as a hypothetical.

[EZ_E]

Let's say that I have a coin graded as Proof-68 Cameo. Would you consider the same date coin in Proof-67 Ultra (or Deep) Cameo to be an upgrade over the first?

 

In general, I would consider these to be equivalent in grade although, personally, I would prefer the 67 deep cam over the 68 cam.

[Hoot]

I see three things being talked about here:

 

1) Grade. An MS68 should have noticably better qualities that determine grade than an MS67. For modern proofs, it's mostly with hairline detail, but may also be influenced by dings, haze, smudges, uneven planchet surfaces, strike, and shiny spots on devices.

 

2) Degree of cameo. For every grade, there's a concomitiant degree of cameo to be discerned. How a person likes this is a matter of personal taste. For example, I like deep cameo devices on pre-1978 proofs. But for proofs of 1978-present, it's a big yawn. For the National Wildlife Medals, the cameo contrast looks ridiculous.

 

3) Monetary worth. For most modern pieces (post-1838), this is tied to (1) and (2) above, but also to rarity. These things interact in a three-dimensional Euclidean space to help determine monetary worth. Every point in that space is non-deterministic, however, since there are other, more subtle uncertainties that inpinge on the final determination of market value. Moreover, ths space is different for each series, issue, and variety. So, to use this as a determination of grade makes zero sense to me.

 

I think that the underlying problem is how the question is asked. It mixes up qualities that affect desirability, not grade. So, which coin you'd rather have is more a matter of desire, thus appeal to the individual's eye (as has been said) than any other quality.

 

Hoot

[TomB]

I knew you would eventually get around to agreeing with me, Hoot!

[Hoot]

I knew you would eventually get around to agreeing with me, Hoot!

 

Yeah, It's ironic that you recently agreed with me! (I can't even remember what thread that was in!) But believe me, I'm not agreeing with you out of any sense of reciprocity!

 

Hoot

[Leothelion]

There are non-cam coins verses their sister cams that do have stunning eye appeal!

How I know this is that I have them right here in my collection! But the majority would want the heavy cam more in monetary terms! But why both coins can't be desired by the same collector is probably the ninth wonder of the world!

 

Leo

 

Also, is this really a philosophical question? It probably is!

[michael]

this is a really simple question to answer......... for me

 

i would need to look at both coins side by side in person sight seen

 

the coin with the greater eye appeal would win

 

 

michael