NEWP.....

[AcesKings]

I just picked this one up today, and would like to ask about PL designations. I went to a local show last week (6/13) and while going through each dealers cases I noticed a few certified PL and DPL Morgans. One thing I noticed was when looking straight on to the coins they appeared normal or pretty much so. It wasn't until you looked at them at a slight angle that they showed their mirrors. This left me a bit confused, as I always thought of PL as being similar to what you'd see on modern proofs with mirrors at any angle of view. So, I guess my question would be, what exactly constitutes a PL coin?

 

Oh yeah, my new addition......

 

 

 

PS- The lines in front of Miss Liberty are die polish lines.

[clarkbar04]

Looks like a nice pickup. I don't believe i have personally examined a DPL certified coin so I would not be able to offer much advice, but I have seen enough with black fields and frosty devices to THINK I know what they are. I would agree with your thinking that they shouldn't need to be tilted but what do I know. I recently picked up a raw 79-S I can see my reflection from arms length.

[physics-fan3.14]

PL has absolutely nothing to do with the cameo contrast - that is a common misconception. A completely brilliant coin will just as easily earn the PL as a fully deep cameo'd specimen. The Prooflike designation is based on the depth of the mirrors - basically, how far away is a reflection clearly visible. Try this - stand your coin on its edge next to a ruler. Shine a light on the coin, and see how many inches on the ruler you can clearly read the numbers. Each TPG will define PL and DPL differently, but a PL coin will be a few inches, and a DPL coin will be several inches.

 

PL coins from different eras and different series will appear differently. The Seated Liberty coins often very closely resemble proofs (because they were sometimes made with old proof dies). Modern PLs have a very brilliant, deep finish. It all depends on teh coins we're talking about.

[AcesKings]

Thank you Jason, I've heard of the 3-6" (IIRC) rule, what had me scratching my head was that the ones I seen at the show appeared like "normal" Morgans when viewed straight on. I guess it made me wonder how you could get any reflection to measure unless you viewed them at the right angle. A. Phillips has a few PL in the Money Marketplace that pretty much depict what I mean. His pictures show basically straight on shots of PL's that appear pretty much like any Morgan (frost/luster in the fields), but I'm sure when viewed at another angle the mirrors pop out. Is it common to have to "play" with the angles to get the best measurement of the mirrors?

 

I guess it also made me wonder how the TPG's determine PL and DPL designations, since I'm sure they don't take the time to measure out the depth of the reflection on the coins surface.

[physics-fan3.14]

Taking pictures of PL's is very challenging. Getting the right balance between honestly showing any surface marks and showing the mirrors is very tricky. If there is cameo contrast and color as well? Forget about it! PL coins are very similar to proof coins in terms of how you should approach a photograph. I would guess that those coins are all very attractive in hand, and would show the mirrors quite clearly - but the pictures don't necessarily reflect that.

[AcesKings]

I'm sorry, I guess what I'm trying to explain/ask isn't coming through right. I wasn't knocking A. Phillips coins or pics and I'm sure his coins are stunning in hand. I just used them as an example of what I noticed on the PL and DPL coins I seen at the show. Those showed the same type of frost/luster in the fields until viewed at certain angles.

 

I had always thought a PL coin would show the mirrors at any angle, much like a modern proof does. Apparently I was wrong, and a PL and DPL can show some type of frost/luster in the fields depending how you view them. I did try to measure the depth on mine and found using the light helps eliminate the frosty view of the surface and shows the mirrors better. So, I guess that answered my question about having to play around with them to find the best reflective view. Thank you for your replies, and helping me answer my own questions.

[david3142]

It can be harder to tell PL coins which do not have contrast. This one for instance, is fully PL but looks brilliant, especially straight on. I would imagine most people would not call this a PL from the pictures, but I assure you, the mirrors are quite nice in hand. There just happens to be very little contrast.

 

 

Cameo coins are generally preferred, of course.

 

 

[AcesKings]

Thank you David. That picture clearly shows what I was trying to find out. After rereading Jason's posts I guess he said the same thing, I just didn't understand when he explained it.

[jpcienkus]

Beautiful CC Aces. I'm a big fan of PL and DPL Morgans. Nice addition.