Peace $ Newp

[mumu]

I am going to do the April Baltimore show and get it imaged and try a walk through, then image again if it goes. No sense mailing it now. Especially with the holiday USPS situation. NGC will be at the NYC world show but doesn't look like they are doing grading there. And I imagine Todd doesn't go to that show.

 

That's great news. Looking forward to seeing proper images.

 

I actually think a good video is the best way to view this coin. Todd's pics while great, will only show a static point in time. And unlike DMPL Morgans which lend themselves to that black and white look, these P$ mirrors as you well know are not the same and really must be viewed in hand to see what they are. I don't think they are any less than morgans per se. Just different. They have their own wow factor that isn't quite the same. Ill try and do a better video. I think my other phone has a better camera.

[physics-fan3.14]

I am going to do the April Baltimore show and get it imaged and try a walk through, then image again if it goes. No sense mailing it now. Especially with the holiday USPS situation. NGC will be at the NYC world show but doesn't look like they are doing grading there. And I imagine Todd doesn't go to that show.

 

That's great news. Looking forward to seeing proper images.

 

I'll be honest - if you want good pictures, don't send it to Todd. Bob (robec) used to take all my pics, and is fantastic to work with. I do my own now (and would be really excited to try my hand at this coin). Messydesk does excellent work as well.

 

I have been not been impressed with pictures from Todd that weren't Morgans (he does Morgan's well, he specializes in Morgans, he sells Morgans).

[mumu]

I am going to do the April Baltimore show and get it imaged and try a walk through, then image again if it goes. No sense mailing it now. Especially with the holiday USPS situation. NGC will be at the NYC world show but doesn't look like they are doing grading there. And I imagine Todd doesn't go to that show.

 

That's great news. Looking forward to seeing proper images.

 

I'll be honest - if you want good pictures, don't send it to Todd. Bob (robec) used to take all my pics, and is fantastic to work with. I do my own now (and would be really excited to try my hand at this coin). Messydesk does excellent work as well.

 

I have been not been impressed with pictures from Todd that weren't Morgans (he does Morgan's well, he specializes in Morgans, he sells Morgans).

 

I think everyone you mentioned does great work. But only Todd sets up at shows as far as I know. I just don't like mailing coins through the mail. We here tend to collect unique irreplaceable coins.

[RWB]

Sorry, but it is absolutely not proof-like, unless there is some magical property associated with it. Compare to a PL Morgan for a more-or-less standard.

[mumu]

Sorry, but it is absolutely not proof-like, unless there is some magical property associated with it. Compare to a PL Morgan for a more-or-less standard.

 

Aaaaannnnnnnnnd were back to morgan comparisons. UGH

 

OK its not prooflike. You win. I am going to name it my own thing and use that from now on is that OK?

 

Peace dollars are SHINY-THING-LIKE from now on so RWB doesn't get into a a RIck-O like broken record mode.

 

Does that work for you? Can I call the coin Shiny?

[RWB]

Mumu: I apologize - I was too harsh and judgmental. Your enjoyment is what really matters and I unintentionally interfered with that.

 

RWB

 

[mumu]

I don't mind. Your opinion is welcome. I don't disagree with you. I just think it's wrong to compare PL in the peace to PL in the Morgans. I admit I have not seen ANY other PL peace dollars in hand. Not sure if you have. But do think pictures tell enough of the story and comparing to non PL coins there is clearly a HUGE difference. And I also know having seen PL mercs that NGC also does not consider the Morgan then end all when it comes to PL. mercs with PL designation have more die file lines than reflectivity. And this peace is somewhere between the 2 but closer to the Morgan side.

 

I think the problem is that while some have argued that the proof like term doesn't actually have any association with actual proof coins( which I think is dumb) Morgan dmpls actually do resemble cameo proofs. That's too tough of a standard to hold all other coins too as you know Morgans had a very different set of conditions.

[physics-fan3.14]

I admit I have not seen ANY other PL peace dollars in hand. Not sure if you have.

 

There are 2 graded by NGC (both 34D). I've seen one of them in hand. In hand, it was clearly, no questions asked, absolutely PL. It was stronger than many PL Morgans, but a completely different surface texture and quality. The other PL designated, which I have not seen, also has a Star. Usually when I see a Star on a PL coin, it is because the mirrors are exceptionally deep, but not quite DPL.

[mumu]

RWB, or anyone for that matter. Do you agree with what NGC calls PL in the Mer series? The argument is that PL = mirrors. I think the Merc series goes against that. These coins are not reflective to 4 inches.

 

[RWB]

The field scratches are consistent with use of an emery wheel on the die. They should not be visible on the relief, with minor exceptions. That can produce a die with PL fields and is seen on some PL coins of other denominations - but I can't determine reflectivity from the photo.

 

Reflectivity will depend on the grit size of the abrasive.

[mumu]

The field scratches are consistent with use of an emery wheel on the die. They should not be visible on the relief, with minor exceptions. That can produce a die with PL fields and is seen on some PL coins of other denominations - but I can't determine reflectivity from the photo.

 

Reflectivity will depend on the grit size of the abrasive.

 

But PL Morgans never need that much explanation to qualify.

[RWB]

If they are being certified as such, they do (should?) - ask the TPGs. All I can say is that I look for multiple things before making a determination - I suspect they do also, but you can;t put all that on a label.

 

Anyway -- I can tell when I'm being teased!

[mumu]

No it is not you I am teasing. I don't think that the tpgs are using Morgan standards on these. But I also don't think they should. I DO think that merc reverse should be considered PL but I also think it's different from a Morgan.

[RWB]

Ahhh..."if it's shiny it must be proof-like."

 

Nope. I advocate one consistent standard that can be objectively applied and that is built on sound operational data. (For example, surface reflectivity can be measured very easily....but the TPGs have to decide to do that and then to calibrate their nomenclature accordingly.)

[nk1nk]

Rwb,

 

Can surface reflectivity be measured easily on a slabbed coin or does it need to be raw to get an accurate measurement? What method do you use?

 

Nick

[mumu]

Ahhh..."if it's shiny it must be proof-like."

 

Nope. I advocate one consistent standard that can be objectively applied and that is built on sound operational data. (For example, surface reflectivity can be measured very easily....but the TPGs have to decide to do that and then to calibrate their nomenclature accordingly.)

 

Well keep in mind ANACS determined the op coin to be PL. Now I don't know what you feel about ANACS accuracy back during the white holders, but I do know the other NGC PL coins were in them at one time and everything ive seen from ANACS has been pretty accurate. Granted I have not seen many of the new yellow and blue slabbed era coins.

[physics-fan3.14]

Ahhh..."if it's shiny it must be proof-like."

 

Nope. I advocate one consistent standard that can be objectively applied and that is built on sound operational data. (For example, surface reflectivity can be measured very easily....but the TPGs have to decide to do that and then to calibrate their nomenclature accordingly.)

 

Well keep in mind ANACS determined the op coin to be PL. Now I don't know what you feel about ANACS accuracy back during the white holders, but I do know the other NGC PL coins were in them at one time and everything ive seen from ANACS has been pretty accurate. Granted I have not seen many of the new yellow and blue slabbed era coins.

 

Unfortunately, I've had very poor experience crossing ANACS to NGC PL slabs. That is one reason that I didn't buy the Peace $ in the OP.

 

I have attempted to cross 7 ANACS PL coins. Granted, that is a small sample size, but: of the seven, only 1 came back with an NGC PL. 2 Came back with stars, and the rest came back with nothing at all. ANACS was considerably looser on PL than NGC is. (These are all small white holders).

[RWB]

Reliable measurements should be made on the coin without any interfering plastic or glass. Approximations can be made through plastic or glass holders.

 

It's up to the TPGs to agree on a common, data-driven methodology. The depth of mirror on proof coins could be similarly measured and "consist-a-fied."

 

[The simplest method is measurement of the dispersion of a reflected collimated beam generated by a laser diode. An aspheric lens is used for collimation and a simple CCD detector - like the one in your camera - detects the return beam off specific areas of the coin. Characteristics of the return are then compared to the collimated beam; differences can be quantified and these used to build a profile upon which to adopt nomenclature.]

 

[use of real-world subject coins - rather than mathematical modeling - would necessitate use of several hundred specimens for development of a reliable reflected beam profile. The technology is quite old and in wide industrial use for quality control. However, each subject coin has to be measured the same way, and this takes more time than having a person make a guess.]

[physics-fan3.14]

[use of real-world subject coins - rather than mathematical modeling - would necessitate use of several hundred specimens for development of a reliable reflected beam profile. The technology is quite old and in wide industrial use for quality control. However, each subject coin has to be measured the same way, and this takes more time than having a person make a guess.]

 

It would probably be best to start with several hundred of the same type/series. This would be very easy for the Morgan, or any modern series (after 1986). It would be very difficult for some of the series I have.

 

Once you have the theory-to-practice, you could probably gather enough specimens to build a reliable profile for a dozen or so other series (for example, Mercs, Seated Quarters and halves, Liberty head gold). The rest would have to be done the old fashioned way.

[blu62vette]

I dont know PL coins and with that said.... All I can add is that from the photos, PF's 23 and Jersey's 22-D seem to have PL tendencies... I just dont see the frostiness that I think of when it comes to proof-like on the other coins.

 

Mumu I hope that coin is much better in hand than the photos. Good luck!

 

I think you might have meant to use a different noun other than "frostiness." Mint frost in the fields is an excellent indication that the coin is not fully prooflike. If you meant cameo contrasts on the devices, these are also not considered in awarding a PL or DPL designation although the enhanced eye appeal may garner a star. The determination of whether it is PL or not is whether the fields have the requisite amount of reflectivity. It is all about the depth of the mirrors.

 

People often confuse the "cameo contrast" with "prooflike," probably because Morgan dollar prooflikes often have cameo contrast (the most attractive, highest premium Morgan's have black and white contrast, just like a DCAM proof). However, the Prooflike standard is based on the reflectivity of the fields - the devices have no bearing on this. If you look at my registry set, you'll see plenty of coins with some cameo, and plenty without. It is solely based on the fields. Depending on the era, the PL effect could be made differently - modern PLs are completely brilliant and mirrored across the entire coin.

 

I dont think you would lose any money on that coin going from a PL ANACS holder to a * NGC holder.

 

No matter the holder its a rare and unusual coin. And imagine if it got into a NGC PL holder ?

 

Do it as a walk-through at a major show. Pay the ticket and you just may get the upgrade...

 

 

Here's an HD video of the coin. In chrome you can up it to full 1080p HD

 

 

Wow, that coin looks much better in that video than the Ebay sellers pictures indicated. The obverse mirrors are quite strong (much better than any of the Star coins I've seen). The reverse mirrors don't appear quite as strong, and may hold you back from a full PL. Again, this is from looking at the video - in hand, they might be good enough to qualify.

 

 

The reverse mirrors are there a well. The phone was having a tough time focusing with the terser light. You can see an occasional glimpse. I mentioned there is a light sheen of golden toning that made focusing tough especially on the reverse where the rays break the open fields up. Its a really nice coin. I don't think it would go 64 but I think it might be 63. Sellers pics make it look really beat up but once in hand and the mirrors kick in the coin does not look as beat up as the pics at all. Just very hard to photograph.

 

Hopefully you can overcome your fear of mailing coins, and send this to Todd for righteous images. Until then, it is impossible to speculate on a grade or designation for this enigmatic coin.

 

I am going to do the April Baltimore show and get it imaged and try a walk through, then image again if it goes. No sense mailing it now. Especially with the holiday USPS situation. NGC will be at the NYC world show but doesn't look like they are doing grading there. And I imagine Todd doesn't go to that show.

 

I cant do that show, conflicts with FUN. I was in NY doing imaging about a month ago, just for a private client.

[coinman1794]

RWB, or anyone for that matter. Do you agree with what NGC calls PL in the Mer series? The argument is that PL = mirrors. I think the Merc series goes against that. These coins are not reflective to 4 inches.

 

 

PL coins vary in depth between 2 and 4 inches.

[coinman1794]

After reviewing the pictures and video, I do not think this piece qualifies as Prooflike. I have studied the unique PL coins of 1934-1954 and their die state progressions, in great detail. This piece was struck after the mirrors began to fade to a glossy semi-PL sheen.

[dizzlecc]

Getting a PL designation can be tough in other series, outside of Morgans. I collect PL Morgan dollars but I also collect world coins. World coins can look mirrored "shiny" but not meet full reflective qualifications. I have found they are measured on similar scales.

 

A good rule of measure is to stand the coin upright on a ruler or magazine and see if the numbers or print is clearly legible. 4 inches away is good, 2 -3 is questionable depending on the design of the coin and how much open field is available.

 

Even then they can be picky if a part of the field qualifies and a part does not due to toning or die striations.

 

I don't know the merc series very well but smaller coins in general would seem more difficult to measure.

[coinman_23885]

After reviewing the pictures and video, I do not think this piece qualifies as Prooflike. I have studied the unique PL coins of 1934-1954 and their die state progressions, in great detail. This piece was struck after the mirrors began to fade to a glossy semi-PL sheen.

 

For the OP's sake I hate to say this, but I agree with you 100%. I have owned esoteric PL coins before, and I don't think NGC is as liberal as the OP seems to think generally.

[mumu]

It is amazing to me how the law of the land always seems to be "can't grade from pictures" until the coins belong to a not so popular member. Evidenced enough by a member here having seen the coin in hand before I owned it, calling it "absolutely deserving of the PL designation" then changing his opinion once I owned it.

 

Regardless of what NGC would actually do as I have no idea, I can say this, in hand the coin is mirrored and consistently so on both sides. And it is possible in tweaking lighting source to bypass the reflection of the slab and get the coin to do the reflecting. Espeically on these white slabs. Test it on a PL morgan if you please.

 

Luckily I am a collector of coins and not a seller. And as such there is no absolute mutually exclusive correlation between the forums and the enjoyment of coins.

[MarkFeld]

My guess is that the large majority of opinions provided are unbiased and that the OP didn't like those opinions.

[jerseycat10]

Did you return the coin?

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-PROOFLIKE-1934-D-Denver-PEACE-1-ANACS-MS-62-PL-scarcer-than-most-Morgans-/321935044415?hash=item4af4d2ef3f:g:qmIAAOSwPhdVRpNy

 

[mumu]

I didn't. WTF?

[mumu]

I messaged the seller and he cancelled. Not sure what was going on there.