| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 6,244 |
|
|
Valued Member
469 Posts |
There is a coin I am purchasing, a Morgan, that I believe is a higher MS and DMPL. The fields are extremely reflective and it really does look like a mirror. Is there anyone that can show me a real DMPL Morgan in comparison to just a PL?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
The difference between PL and DMPL is really a matter of visual degree. That makes it somewhat personally subjective.
To appreciate the difference,
Google Images 'Morgan proof like'
then
DMPL
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Below are 3 coins that will give you an idea of the difference between the mirror depth of PL and DMPL. If you are buying a PL or DMPL raw, be very careful as the third party graders are very tuff on PL and DMPL coins. I have paid my dues for this information. In fact, I would recommend that you buy a slab coin in PL and DMPL. The 1879 is a MS65 and is semi proof and a very attractive coin. The 1881 S is a MS 66 PL The 1884 CC is a MS 64 DMPL    |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5828 Posts |
OH those are NICE coins  |
|
Valued Member
United States
461 Posts |
On a screen vs in hand make that request extremely difficult.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
246 Posts |
With a raw coin in hand following the guidelines below should help. I feel like the inch scale they use may be a bit conservative in my experience. Hope this helps.... Good information can be found here http://news.coinupdate.com/testing-...nd-ngc-1126/A brief excerpt: "Generally, a semi-prooflike coin should reflect your finger at a distance of 1-2 inches; prooflike, 2-4 inches; and deep mirror prooflike (or "DMPL"), 4-plus inches. The "DMPL" designation also has other requirements. Devices should be frosted with uniform reflectivity at 4-plus inches-on both sides of the coin. In other words, if a section of either obverse or reverse is duller without deep reflectivity, an otherwise "DMPL" coin could test prooflike or worse (no prooflike designation whatsoever)." |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Peaece,
Interesting article by Coin Update.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
Under the right lighting, the mirrored fields on high PL silver coins look almost black, it's very unusual and very beautiful.
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5850 Posts |
Here's an MS64 DMPL Morgan from my collection with two different lightings:   |
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
Nice illustration, Slider23.
Some time ago, I remember a thread that described field reflectivity using a ruler and newsprint to come up with upper and lower limits of each. I found it interesting and loved the quantitative approach.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
I remember a thread that described field reflectivity using a ruler and newsprint to come up with upper and lower limits of each. That was likely me, as it's the method I advocate. A PL coin should clearly and readably reflect 12pt newspaper type at a minimum of 4", from any point of all fields obverse and reverse. A DMPL coin achieves this at a bare minimum distance of 6" and it should be considerably farther, 8" or more. You'll know it if you ever hold a DMPL Morgan. There is no reason why you cannot shave in one, and reflected light from one is genuinely painful to look at. It's very, very darn difficult to represent in photographic imagery. |
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
Ah, but, no - right?
' "You're down a rabbit hole trying to digitally describe an analog concept. You can no more easily quantify "degree of cameo" than you can "beauty of toning." '
|
|
Valued Member
 469 Posts |
Quote:
There is no reason why you cannot shave in one I will have to try that with this coin I am speaking of! |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
' "You're down a rabbit hole trying to digitally describe an analog concept. You can no more easily quantify "degree of cameo" than you can "beauty of toning." '
Cameo still has nothing to do with reflectivity, not in that thread, not in this one. |
|
CCF Sponsor
United States
702 Posts |
Oh, I'm sorry. On the brilliant proofs I've looked at, the devices are reflective like a mirror and the deep cam ones aren't. To me, that's a difference in reflectivity. I guess your proofs are different than mine. That's just my experience.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 6,244 |
|
Posted 06/29/2015 9:50 pm
