Confused...(Ms 60-70) Uncirculated American Coins-Are They Busness Strikes?

Ohhhh, so Coin A can have come from the mint, kept in a roll, not have any signs of wear, but have lots of 'bag marks, or nicks in the fields from the mint. It also might have crappy luster or lost luster over the years by not being sealed.

To a grader, because the lack of signs of wear on the highest point, it would still be an MS. They can't know if it truly is uncirculated but probably was not. It would be graded a very low MS.

And then Coin B, that came from the mint, had great luster and no nicks and above average depth and definition, but circulated a little and shows slight signs of wear. Found by collector, put in a 2X2. The luster would hopefully be kept and the definition would still be there. However, because the slight wear is still there, the grader believes it was in circulation. It would be a high AU. AND would look better than Coin A.

Now if Coin C came from the mint, was dropped into a drawer and occasionally moved around with other coins, it would still show slight signs of wear, even though it had not been in circulation per se. Even though the grader would assume it had been in circulation, it really doesn't matter that the grader is wrong, because the slight wear is still there and would still be AU. So the AU isn't strictly "about uncirculated" but signifies that there is slight wear on the highest points of the coin which in most cases would mean that it had been circulated some. Basically, it looks like it was about uncirculated so it gets an AU grade.

Sooooo
Coin A - uncirculated - no signs of wear - looks ugly - MS 60 probably

Coin B - slightly circulated - slight signs of wear - pretty coin - AU 58ish

Coin C - uncirculated but does show sign of wear - looks good - AU 58ish

Other circumstances:
Coin D - came from mint, uncirculated, looks great, no signs of wear - greater than MS 60

Coin E - proof, not cameo, fields look good, uncirculated, looks great, no signs of wear - PR 60 or above

Coin F - proof, cameo, fields look great, no signs of wear - PR 62 or above

Coin G - proof, deep cameo, looks great, no signs of wear - PR 65 or above

Coin H - proof, cameo, looks good, has signs of wear, obviously has been in circulation - less than PR 60 and considered damaged, but still prettier than most MS coins.

right? Do I get it now? Sorry, I'm so dense..

the grade is not related whether there is cameo or not. cameo, or deep cameo are what are called grade modifiers. A coin can be a PR60 DCAM just as it could be PR69 CAM it could also be PR69 with no cameo at all

Steele, I somehow had accumulated 4 or 5 different proofs of the same coin. I think 1992 S nickel. When I went to the numismedia, the deeper the cameo, the more it was worth. Was that just for that coin? So cameo doesn't really bring the grade up any or does it depend on the series/coin/etc.? hmmmm

This grading stuff is not intuitive at all....

Grade is not determined by where the coin was before it was graded. You can argue all day that a coin straight from the mint should grade higher than one plucked from your pocket (from circulation). It is how the coin looks that determines the grade. In most circumstances**, a professional coin grader has no idea where the coin has been before it was sent in for grading.

**Sometimes grading companies obtain coins that they know are "first" or "early" strikes and add that designation but it still isn't part of the grade. Similarly, they might note that the coin came from a famous collection, a destroyed building, a coin show release, a hoard, a sunken ship, etc. -- but again, that does not determine the grade.