Deep Cameo Versus Ultra Or Star Cameo

[Crazy Mtn Coins]

I just submitted my tenth PCGS deep cameo to NGC for crossover. First off, the only reason I am doing these submissions is an attempt to fill a couple slots in my proof sets that I have about givenup finding an already graded NGC coin. All of my proof sets are NGC only coins. The first nine coins I submitted were all 1950-63 proof 68 deep cameo of various denominations. Of the nine coins, six did not cross and three did. When I looked closely at those that did not cross, the obverse on each was a strong cameo, however, the reverse was a little weaker. Now I am far from a seasoned grader so I could not judge whether I should not have submitted the coins to start with. But my question is, does PCGS when determining a deep cameo use sort of an average of the two sides? And then when NGC looks at the same coin, since they also have the star cameo, are they more likely to call that coin a star cameo? Does NGC use the criteria that both sides have to be a strong (ultra) cameo and essentially grade each side separately. This topic probably has already been discussed before, however, I am just trying to learn a little here.

[bsshog40]

I dont have coins graded but I would assume that ultra cameo would have to have both sides a deep cameo. Just as there has to be cameo on both sides to be a cameo coin. I think the star would fall in to the category as close to ultra on a regular cameo coin.

[MarkFeld]

I just submitted my tenth PCGS deep cameo to NGC for crossover. First off, the only reason I am doing these submissions is an attempt to fill a couple slots in my proof sets that I have about givenup finding an already graded NGC coin. All of my proof sets are NGC only coins. The first nine coins I submitted were all 1950-63 proof 68 deep cameo of various denominations. Of the nine coins, six did not cross and three did. When I looked closely at those that did not cross, the obverse on each was a strong cameo, however, the reverse was a little weaker. Now I am far from a seasoned grader so I could not judge whether I should not have submitted the coins to start with. But my question is, does PCGS when determining a deep cameo use sort of an average of the two sides? And then when NGC looks at the same coin, since they also have the star cameo, are they more likely to call that coin a star cameo? Does NGC use the criteria that both sides have to be a strong (ultra) cameo and essentially grade each side separately. E This topic probably has already been discussed before, however, I am just trying to learn a little here.

 

In answer to your questions:

 

1) "But my question is, does PCGS when determining a deep cameo use sort of an average of the two sides?"

No, both PCGS and NGC supposedly grade each side independently, and require that each side meets the standard. So if one side is deep or ultra cameo, but the other is not, the coin should not receive the designation.

 

2) "And then when NGC looks at the same coin, since they also have the star cameo, are they more likely to call that coin a star cameo?"

A star designation is supposed to be used to signify exceptional eye-appeal. So, for example, if a coin is extra strong cameo, but not quite ultra cameo, NGC might award the star, along with the cameo designation.

 

3) "Does NGC use the criteria that both sides have to be a strong (ultra) cameo and essentially grade each side separately." As I noted in my answer to question 1) above, yes, each side should merit the ultra cameo designation in order that it be awarded.

 

[Crazy Mtn Coins]

Thanks Mark.

[James_OldeTowne]

I have long felt that, contrary to popular opinion, NGC has slightly more stringent standards on average than PCGS for the UCAM designation. So, it would not surprise me that a lower-than-expected percentage of proof coins cross from ATS. Exceptions will be found, obviously, with some coins in either holder that are marginal for the DCAM/UCAM designation.

 

We have attempted similar crossovers for customers with a little better success than what you experienced, but not much.

 

Please note that I am not claiming that the NGC standard is somehow "better", just because it seems slightly more stringent. It is just their own standard.

 

Incidentally, what are the coins you need?

[RWB]

I wonder why the major companies don't use some sort of objective measurement, such as dispersion of a collimated light beam, of the old percent of contrast used in optical tests?

[Crazy Mtn Coins]

My latest submission for crossover is in NGC hands and that is a 1958 Washington 68 deep cam. If that does not go, that is no. 1 on my list. Also looking for 1958 10c 69 ucam, 1951 10c 69 cam, 1958 5c 69 cam, 1952 5c 69 cam, and 1952 1c 68 cam. I was looking for 1956 - 1959 5c in 68 ucam but essentially gave up on those.

[Crazy Mtn Coins]

BTW I do have two deep cameos I would sell (1958 25c pf68 and 1955 5c pf68). As you might guess, these did not crossover. I now only purchase coins for crossover explaining what I am trying so that I can return them. With Express mail and NGC Early Bird grading I can return the coin to the seller in ten days.

[coinman1794]

I just submitted my tenth PCGS deep cameo to NGC for crossover. First off, the only reason I am doing these submissions is an attempt to fill a couple slots in my proof sets that I have about givenup finding an already graded NGC coin. All of my proof sets are NGC only coins. The first nine coins I submitted were all 1950-63 proof 68 deep cameo of various denominations. Of the nine coins, six did not cross and three did. When I looked closely at those that did not cross, the obverse on each was a strong cameo, however, the reverse was a little weaker. Now I am far from a seasoned grader so I could not judge whether I should not have submitted the coins to start with. But my question is, does PCGS when determining a deep cameo use sort of an average of the two sides? And then when NGC looks at the same coin, since they also have the star cameo, are they more likely to call that coin a star cameo? Does NGC use the criteria that both sides have to be a strong (ultra) cameo and essentially grade each side separately. E This topic probably has already been discussed before, however, I am just trying to learn a little here.

 

 

1) "But my question is, does PCGS when determining a deep cameo use sort of an average of the two sides?"

 

They are not supposed to, but sometimes, this is clearly the case (at both services). An extra nice obverse and mediocre reverse has led to many an Ultra or Deep Cameo.

 

2) "And then when NGC looks at the same coin, since they also have the star cameo, are they more likely to call that coin a star cameo?"

 

The STAR is NOT just for eye appeal; exceptional characteristics on a coin's obverse also warrant the designation, regardless of overall eye appeal. NGC is supposed to give a STAR if the obverse meets a full designation, but the reverse does not. For instance, you could have a coin that's ULTRA-CAM/CAM that grades STAR CAM, or a coin with a CAM or ULTRA-CAM/brilliant that grades only STAR.

 

3) "Does NGC use the criteria that both sides have to be a strong (ultra) cameo and essentially grade each side separately[?]"

 

Again, both services claim to use a consistent standard across the board, but in practice, this is not always the case.

 

 

Overall, I find all of the special finish designations-- CAM, DCAM, PL, DMPL, and STAR to be extremely nuanced and very inconsistently applied, by all services.

[Crazy Mtn Coins]

Coinman1794 thanks. My experience follows your discussion and that has been my feelings but I am just basing that on my nine crossover attempts.