| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 3,147 |
|
Valued Member
Canada
352 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1192 Posts |
Neither would be considered a cameo. The 1965 has cameo contrast on the obverse, but not the reverse. It takes both sides to qualify for that designation.
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
352 Posts |
Ahhh...thanks so much Pokermandude.
|
|
Moderator
 Canada
10463 Posts |
Quote:
It takes both sides to qualify for that designation No, it does not. While modern proof strikes do have frosted devices on both sides, many older specimen and proof strikes (prior to 1981 in Canadian coins) have "cameo" designations with only the criteria being that devices on the obverse (effigy) are frosted. The term cameo, comes from older glass and shell artwork with raised, contrasting busts. This is in contrast with intaglio, which has a negative relief image. And yes, the 1965 dollar is considered a 'cameo'. "Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
Edited by SPP-Ottawa
04/25/2014 8:49 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1192 Posts |
Really? I've always been told that both sides need to show cameo contrast to get the designation. As far as I know, that is true with the grading standards of both ICCS and PCGS.
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Quote:
I've always been told... Told by whom? "Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
Edited by SPP-Ottawa
04/25/2014 9:13 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1192 Posts |
http://coins.about.com/od/coingradi...of-Coins.htm"In order to obtain a cameo designation, both sides of the coin must have a cameo contrast. If one side of the coin has a "deep cameo" and the other side only has a "cameo," then the coin will receive a "cameo" designation." It also makes intuitive sense. Like when a coin that is more worn on one side than the other would receive a grade of the lower of the two grades.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
352 Posts |
Pokermandude, the website you cite deals with American coins. Is it any different for Canadian coins?
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
Yes, as I mentioned above. Modern proof strikes are intentionally struck with cameos on both sides. That definition does not apply to Canadian business, proof-like and specimen coins struck with fresh dies (prior to 1981).
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
Only the obverse has to have a cameo for ICCS, but both sides needed for PCGS (not positive but I think this is so).
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
352 Posts |
Interesting. So now the crass question. Is there much premium placed on a cameo? Even in, say, this condition? Thanks.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5417 Posts |
Neither even close to cameo. The definition of Cameo in terms of coins is proof-like or mirror like. You should be able to read words that would be reflected onto the surfaces of the coin if held above a book. What a cameo coin looks like:  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
zxc.....your picture as an example of a 'cameo' is a bad one.
Your picture demonstrates Mirror surfaces which has more to do with 'proof-like', than 'cameo'.
With ICCS, you can have a coin with muted lustre and still have a 'cameo'.
Edited by doubleeagle59
04/26/2014 3:44 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
352 Posts |
zxcccxz, are you saying that the coin you show is the only example of a cameo?
|
|
Moderator
Canada
10463 Posts |
"Discovery follows discovery, each both raising and answering questions, each ending a long search, and each providing the new instruments for a new search." -- J. Robert OppenheimerContent of this post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses...0/deed.en_USMy eBay store
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
352 Posts |
SPP, thanks. The '65 definitely looks like one of your cameos.
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 3,147 |
Posted 04/25/2014 6:43 pm
