#4 1987-S Prcam 5c Jefferson Nickel - This May Be A Dud PR-64?

It's a copper nickel coin, just like Australian coinage metals.
So as an Australian, perhaps I am still qualified to comment.

The Royal Australian Mint occasionally uses hardened dies to extend die life, either by nitriding them, or chrome plating them. Dunno if the U.S. Mint does that.
Some Australian coins have really shiny fields, that look to be proof, but they are still business strikes for circulation.
Only the coins from mint sets (and never circulated), show no signs of bag marks or circulation damage.
This U.S. Nickel shows the same characteristics.

From the view that it is a proof?
No, it is not.
There seems to be no signs of circulation wear, to be seen in these pictures.
It is from a mint set, not a proof set, but a good strike from fresh dies. That would explain the slight cameo effect.

Not a pristine coin, there is some scuffing above the dome of Monticello (3rd picture).

Yes, that is proof set packaging.

https://www.coincommunity.com/us_pr...ets/1987.asp

not all proof strikes are d cam's..

I have been educated.