Welcome to CoinTalk! It is highly unlikely that this is worth having graded, unless they have significant sentimental value and you want the protection of the holder. This is probably a mid-grade proof (65-66). I don't see any trace of cameo. In this condition, it has a value of about $5 (maybe $10 if it is 67). These are common coins. Getting it certified would cost about $30 - so definitely not worth it. In order for this coin to be worth the cost of grading, it would need to be very high grade with cameo contrast.
I have no idea. I started coin roll hunting about a year and a half ago. I I don’t know if it was when I was coin roll hunting or what. When I began I was probably searching through five to $600 a week of coin. I don’t remember having it prior to that Sorry
If it was polished it wasn’t polished by me I’m new to this. I thought if you rub any coin with a cloth it takes away the luster. Again I’m new to this so I really can’t say
Don’t proof coins though have like a shiny mirror like background and a more satin raised up areas like the picture of Lincoln
Not during 1963. The majority of proofs for that year were brilliant across the entire coin. One distinction between proof and circulation strike coins is not only the finish, but the edges of the coin. You coin likely has razor sharp edges unlike the edges encountered in everyday change. I agree with physicsfan, it’s a proof coin.
Yes, some of them do. The satiny raised up areas (known as "devices") are called "cameo" contrast. These are similar to the cameo brooches that were popular in the Victorian era - a white portrait against some colored background (hence the name). In the 1960's, the technology used to create the white, satiny raised devices (the cameo contrast) was very delicate and didn't last for many strikes. After it wore away, you were left with something like the coin you show - known as a "brilliant proof." That means there is none of the cameo left. There are cameo proofs on 1963 cents - but yours does not have it. Because the cameo contrast is considered to be very attractive, and because few coins were struck with this effect, those with a cameo contrast are considerably rarer and more expensive. Hence, because your coin lacks this contrast, it is not as valuable. The technology used to create this effect was changed in 1968 (and a few times since) such that today, almost every single proof struck has the cameo contrast.
Very nice to have that. But get some good 2x2 flips (without pvc) to store your finds in. Rarely will you fond one that will be a candidate for grading, but the flips will offer protection.
I am so grateful for all of you that took time to respond to my question. I am learning a lot with this forum.
I Have the BCW vinyl coin flips or do you think I should purchase those cardboard with a little window coin flips? Once I posted this question I read it. If this question doesn’t show you how much of a greenhorn I am I don’t know what will...
Try to only use for low value or coins only going to be in for a short time. As far as mylar cardboard holders, they are good but the downsides are that you need more than one denomination, the mylar can hold dust and cardboard fluff to the coin, which can cause issues at times, and the staples can scratch the coins near it or the coin if not careful removing it. There are flips called Saflips which do not have vinyl/pvc which are a bit more but worth it for long term storage, IMO.
Very good. So my reasoning for asking.... You didn't break it out of a proof set, someone else did and you found it in circulation. That coins was not meant for circulation or to be spent. It's in very good condition for being found in circulation. Nice find!
Besides the archival quality inherent in Saflips, the other advantage to them is that you can easily remove a coin from the flip when you want to take photos eliminating the glare. Chris
All of this is GREAT info. I will buy some today. Thank you again Tina Update: Saflips are on the way! Thanks again!
