1963 dcam

[Sunni67]

Beginner here with another question,
is there a way to identify a Dcam cent from another cent?
Example:Here is a couple pictures of 3 1963 cent’s that seem different from other ones that I have. Can someone enlighten me on whether the ones in the photos are Dcam’s or not?
Thank you In advance for all of your knowledge it has helped me out a lot in my quest to learn something new.
“” I feel like a sponge sometimes “”B4CEE286-4143-46F6-9A05-0B46A7847952.jpgB4CEE286-4143-46F6-9A05-0B46A7847952.jpgF0459F5B-AB88-46D2-84DF-C138A51DC4CC.jpgihopethat the pictures aren’t to blurry.

[GrumpyEd]

Yes it's pretty easy.

None of them could ever possibly be DCAM.

First of all proof is a method of manufacture not a grade or condition and they only made proofs in Philly in 63 so there is no such thing as a 63 D proof and none of those are proofs.

DCAM is only on proofs and only when there is full frost in every area that should have frost and no breaks in the frost and the fields need to have the full mirrors and I think they might even have ways of rating how well it mirrors.
Other than that a proof could be a CAM (less deep mirrors) or a regular proof not CAM or DCAM.

In general, almost all modern proofs are CAM/DCAM but few of the older ones make the cut and will be regular proofs.

[GrumpyEd]

Adding, so your 3 cents are all bus strikes.

You can only grade them (buss strikes) as circ coins or MS grades. Yours are probably MS grades around MS62-63 maybe RD maybe RB depending on toning.
Sometimes they can be mirror-like/brilliant and someone might say it is PL proof-like or DMPL, some TPGs will say PL on holders but only in certain series and I've never seen it noted on a cent.

Check out:

https://www.pcgs.com/news/a-look-at-pcgs-designations

[Sunni67]

Thanks a million Ed!!!
I have another question:
why is it that pcgs market price app don’t have any 1965/66/67 cents listed?
i hope you know what app I am referring to? It is one of the official apps of theirs. Is there just none of these years good enough or are they that scarce?

[GrumpyEd]

It does list them but only in the MS because the mint did not make them in proofs (1965-66-67).

Listed here in MS:

https://www.pcgs.com/prices/detail/lincoln-cent-modern/47/most-active

Not here in Proofs:

https://www.pcgs.com/prices/detail/lincoln-cent-modern/47/most-active/pr

I think they list them someplace in SMS special mint sets but not sure where, you might find it if you searched.

[GrumpyEd]

You can find some SMS cent sales prices here:

https://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/details/1965-sms-sp/93290

[Sunni67]

Thank you ed,
you are so wonderful in helping me.i have learned so much . It is greatly appreciated.
I have enclosed a picture of another coin I want to see if I am correct there is a creased line coming out from the front his neck . Would that be a die crack? Also, is there something wrong with his ear?
Thanks again , Sunni3227A1CA-C81D-4D40-AFC6-B5D99FA36609.jpg

[GrumpyEd]

The 2004-D does not look like a crack.

More like a linear plating bubble.
It looks rounded and bubbly.

Sometimes they smash with a toothpick but not always, oxide fills them up and they get hard.

[enamel7]

That is without a doubt a plating bubble.

[jfines69]

The Edcyclopedia of Coins knows his stuff... Thanks Ed!!!

[jfines69]

Thank you ed,
you are so wonderful in helping me.i have learned so much . It is greatly appreciated.
I have enclosed a picture of another coin I want to see if I am correct there is a creased line coming out from the front his neck . Would that be a die crack? Also, is there something wrong with his ear?
Thanks again , Sunni[ATTACH=CONFIG]143697[/ATTACH]

Sunni,
It is always best to place different coins in their own thread... The 63Ds are fine because they were comparison samples for your question... The 2004 should have been in its own thread... Also you would get more looks and responses... Hope that helps!!!