I recently sent in two 1959 Lincoln Proof Pennies to be graded by PCGS. I am really really really new to sending stuff to them, and what I have seen so far does not impress me, and I don't know how they "set the standard". Yes, I was disappointed in the grades my coins received. However, some grades I beleive were justified, and I was only off by a grade, up or down 1. These two Lincoln Proofs were deep cameo, and they were flawless. I have been collecting for over 33 years now, and I have seen a few coins in my day. I looked VERY carefully at each coin I was considering turning in to be slabbed before I paid the particularly high fees to keep costs down. And when I saw that my two proofs came back as "PR 64RD" and "PR 65RD" I was seriously ****ed off. They are not red, they are most definately cameo. If I had pics, I would post them. I am waiting to get my coins back in the mail. I just want some opinions out there. What do you think of their grading standards?
I'm sorry to say but I don't think PCGS got these wrong. Every copper coin is given a color designation, RD (red), RB (red-brown), or BN (brown). Red is the most preferred as it is the original minted color. I don't understand why you would be upset about getting a RD designation. CAMEO designations are tough on 50's proofs and they will deny the designation for contrast weakness in any area of the obverse or reverse devices. Without photos there is no way we can judge the accuracy of PCGS decisions, but even with photos, it would be almost impossible to see hairlines which are the most common reason for a lower grade on a proof coin. Since you stated that the coins were flawless, I will assume there are no spots on the coins. I personally would not have any raw coin valued under $200 graded because the grading fees are too high relative to the price of the coin. Hope you have better luck in the future.
Thanks for that info. I looked for hairline cracks, I truly did. I saw nothing. I used a loupe 30X power. There were no spots to speak of, no toning, anything. I'm really curious to know what they found that made them not cameo. I am happy with the Red, but I am very surprised they didn't make cameo. My coins looked even better than what they called cameo on their photograde online, plus, the ones they showed being deep cameo, didn't have the luster mine did, as well as having spots which mine didn't as I've mentioned. Thanks for your input!
Cameo is determined by the amount of frost on the coin's devices and nothing else. It has nothing to do with the color, or the grade for that matter. So for your coins not to get the Deep Cameo designation or the Cameo Designation, then the frost must be lacking someplace. Honestly, there are a great many people who think their coins are worthy of the CAM or DCAM designations when they really are not. So you are definitely not alone on that count. Probably more people misjudge this than ever get it right. As for the grades being lower than you expected, there are numerous reasons that could explain that. It could be hairlines, it could be tiny hits (they are very particular with Proofs when it comes to contact marks), it could even be a poor strike or low reflectivity in the mirrors. And given the date you stated - all of those things are the norm and not the exception.
