Last night, I had a revelation: DMPL vs. PL (WARNING: HUGE IMAGES)

[James_OldeTowne]

I've recently accepted another eBay consignment, and one of the coins is an 1880-S Morgan dollar. It's a liner, grading MS-64 to MS-65, and it is PL. However, it's a coin whose allure and appeal outweighs it's technical merits (as is often the case of the 1880-S and 1881-S Morgans). It's the kind of coin that is difficult to put down once you've picked it up to look at it.

 

Last night, while enjoying the coin, and pondering a description for it, I thought of what it would take to descriptively enhance it's appeal as merely a "prooflike" coin, as opposed to a "deep mirror prooflike" coin. Then, I suddenly realized something about DMPL vs. PL Morgans that has never occurred to me before: I actually prefer PL coins over DMPLs!

 

Although there is always something neat about the high contrast between the frosty devices and mirror-black fields of a DMPL coin, a PL like the one I'm discussing provides the added benefit of subtle, but lively cartwheel luster. It's like a DMPL gives you two big pieces of candy: frosty detail, mirrored fields, but a PL gives you three medium pieces of candy: frosty detail, lightly mirrored fields, and thrilling cartwheels. Of course a non-PL coin gives you only one measly piece of candy: cartwheel luster.

 

Am I just plain nuts??

 

 

James

[AlixTCat]

That fourth picture really shows the candy.

 

If this is PL, I have some nice PL's in a group I am consigning for my boss. I had not really thought about them other than what grade I could give them. Now I will be looking at them in a different light, so to speak. I dipped a couple of 1934 Peace dollars last night because they were awful looking. Now I know they are PL. Couldn't tell with all that crud on them. It took acetone to get the gunk off and thiouria (sp?) dip to get the [embarrasing lack of self control] off. Now I have two LOVELY PL coins with loads of luster and wonderful cartwheels. I don't usually dip coins. Actually, these two are my first. I tend to like the natural patina. But these would go for nothing the way they were.

 

Great pictures and story.

 

Jonathan

[Die Varieties]

Beautiful!!! Great pics too!

[Hoot]

I don't think you're nuts, at least not so for liking PL vs. DMPL coins. In the Barber series, I prefer proofs that are "only" CAM vs. DCAM. Typically, they've been messed with less as well.

 

Nice Morgans.

 

Hoot

[EVillageProwler]

Although there is always something neat about the high contrast between the frosty devices and mirror-black fields of a DMPL coin, a PL like the one I'm discussing provides the added benefit of subtle, but lively cartwheel luster.

 

A "DMPL" designation is given strictly to coins bsed on depth of mirrors, not intensity of contrast. Likewise for the "PL" designation.

 

(In the olden days, PCGS used to give liners between DMPL and PL a break if the cameo contrast was significant. But not now. Dunno 'bout NGC.)

 

But, I agree that many PL Morgans are more appealing (to me) than their DMPL counterparts.

 

EVP