Wondering if I could get a CAM out of this through PCGS. I know I keep asking, I value the input. Thanks in advance.
Very Nice coin ! Not a CAM . Please read from this website about CAMS and other Proofs. Cameo, A Numismatic Definition of Cameo (thesprucecrafts.com)
That’s a good test for depth of mirrors, and I know people use a similar test, like trying to read reflected newsprint when checking for prooflike (PL) and deep mirror prooflike (DMPL) status on Morgan dollars. But the depth of the mirrors alone is not what makes a Cameo or Deep Cameo proof. It’s the contrast between the mirrors in the fields and the frost on the devices. You have Brilliant proofs, like the coin above, which can have lovely deep mirrors, but they have no contrast between the fields and the devices. The next step up is a Cameo proof (CAM) which (like a jewelry cameo, from which the term derives) has contrasting elements: mirrored fields but frosty, matte devices. Above that is the Deep Cameo proof (DCAM), where the contrast is especially striking. These will have a true “black-and-white” appearance, with “caked on” frost on the devices, very deep mirrors, and a starkly visible contrast between the two. Modern proofs are usually DCAM by default, due to how the dies are prepared nowadays. But the reason CAM and DCAM are a big deal on pre-1971 proof coins, and Franklin halves in particular, is because Brilliant proofs were the norm back then, and only the earliest strikes off the freshly prepared dies came out CAM or DCAM, if any at all.
Here is the Franklin half from my old early-2000s 20th century type set. It was a DCAM. Even though these low-res images were produced on my ancient, 1998-vintage flatbed scanner at the time, you can see the contrast on this coin. Had there been small brilliant areas (frost breaks) in any of the devices, PCGS would have more likely given this coin a CAM designation, or no designation at all (brilliant), rather than awarding it a DCAM. Its black-and-white appearance was much more striking in hand than in these old scans.
PS- @Wade Elliott - even though the coin you posted above is no CAM, and not even close to it, that PR69 grade is pretty impressive. Very sweet piece. I'll bet a PR69 CAM or DCAM would be worth some serious $$$.
No cam. The devices are definitely not frosted. I've got a 1955 PF69* for my birth year set and the devices are frosted but not 100%.
One picture shows a little cameo on the reverse but nothing on the reverse. Both sides have to show a cameo to even get in the running. Sometimes I see coins that have a cameo effect, but they don’t get the designation.
