| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 2,631 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
Absolutely a proof. I don't think it is cameo, it may be lightly frosted, but I don't see any in the images. Daytime picture may work better. Nice coin and  to CCF Edited by TNG
09/04/2017 11:10 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
On the fifth pix, under the chin, is that hairlines or just surface fuzz(I hope) because your coin looks proof, say 65/66. If those are hairlines somebody's tried to shine it, that'll kill it it a lot lower, even impaired, ouch! No cameo, too reflective by pix.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
50 Posts |
TheNickelGuy: Thanks for that feedback, I'll try to post day pics.
Crazyb0: It's not on the coin, scuffs and lint on the sleeve.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
It is definitely a proof and I would say a "brilliant proof." I don't see any cameo coming through or frosting of the devices. Is it sealed in the original mint cellophane or has it been sealed in another holder? Nice coin!  In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Valued Member
United States
50 Posts |
spruett001: That I am unsure of. It is currently sealed in a Mylar SAF 'T' flip material. It is in such nice condition though that I'd say yes, original seal. It looks even better in person.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
50 Posts |
If that's what the mint sealed it in.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
14463 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
50 Posts |
You got it, thanks for that.  |
|
Moderator
United States
14463 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
Quote:
It is currently sealed in a Mylar SAF 'T' flip material. That's what I was thinking. It didn't look like the crinkly/wrinkly cellophane used by the Mint for the proof sets then. Quote:
If that's what the mint sealed it in. They didn't - see above. That means that it has been handled outside of the original mint packaging at least once. However, it still looks very nice and may retain its proof value. That is not very much but, more than 5 cents! Realistically, it is worth $1-$2. Even if it were a cameo proof, it wouldn't really raise the value. So, let's say it's worth $1.50. I hope this helps. In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
 just a normal proof. No cameo detected. One to save, but not terribly valuable. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
, Brilliant proof , no cameo . |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4212 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
67 Posts |
The word cameo got my attention, can someone please explain what cameo means?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12477 Posts |
Quote:
can someone please explain what cameo means? Earlier proofs (I'll say pre-1970 for the U.S.) can vary between brilliant, cameo and deep cameo. Modern proofs are generally deep cameo by design. Here's a comparison of two 1955 Jefferson nickel proofs. The left coin has frosted devices that contrast with the fields and I consider it a cameo. The right coin has a consistent mirror finish including the devices and fields and would be a brilliant proof:  They are both proofs but, obviously not the same. I hope that helps. P.S. Also check out the CCF Glossary. In Memory of Crazyb0 12-26-1951 to 7-27-2020
In Memory of Tootallious 3-31-1964 to 4-15-2020
In Memory of T-BOP 10-12-1949 to 1-19-2024
Edited by spru
09/17/2017 03:49 am
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 2,631 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 09/04/2017 11:09 pm
