Question on DMPL Morgans

Morgan13

I feel I should know this by now but I want to be 100% sure.
Does a DMPL Morgan need to have a cameo appearance with frosted devices to make DMPL?
Or can it have deep mirrors without the cameo or frosted devices?
Same question just worded differently?

If not does anyone have an example with deep mirrors without a cameo?

I only ask because I submitted a coin with awesome mirrors and weak cameo and frosted devices.
This is the only image I have before I sent it in.

david3142

Cameo appearance does not strictly matter for the PL or DMPL designation. It is only the depth of mirrors, although it does help make them look better and maybe helps a bit for that reason.

Most 20th century Morgans have very little contrast except generally 04-O and sometimes 01-O.

Morgan13

@david3142 said:
Cameo appearance does not strictly matter for the PL or DMPL designation. It is only the depth of mirrors, although it probably does help make them look better and maybe helps a bit for that reason.

Most 21st century Morgans have very little contrast except generally 04-O and sometimes 01-O.

That's good to hear. The 1921 Morgan I sent in has tremendous mirrors but very little contrast. My fingers are crossed for a DMPL. I looked for cleaning and could only see polish marks. Let's just hope it DMPL's!

MFeld

@150K said:

@david3142 said:
Cameo appearance does not strictly matter for the PL or DMPL designation. It is only the depth of mirrors, although it probably does help make them look better and maybe helps a bit for that reason.

Most 21st century Morgans have very little contrast except generally 04-O and sometimes 01-O.

That's good to hear. The 1921 Morgan I sent in has tremendous mirrors but very little contrast. My fingers are crossed for a DMPL. I looked for cleaning and could only see polish marks. Let's just hope it DMPL's!

The coin doesn't look DMPL in that image and the PCGS DMPL population is only 19 for all grades combined. I'm sorry, but I think your chances of success are extremely remote.

FlyingAl

Looks like a 1921 Philly?

Several DMPLs on CoinFacts appear to be graded from that same obverse die, but the pictures are too poor to be certain.

Morgan13

@FlyingAl said:
Looks like a 1921 Philly?

Several DMPLs on CoinFacts appear to be graded from that same obverse die, but the pictures are too poor to be certain.

Yes it is a -P
I agree. I wasn't really taking one to post. I would have taken better if I were.
It's got nice reflection in the fields.
Sorry I couldn't post a better image.

Morgan13

FlyingAl just curious how you can tell they are from the same die?
It's always good to learn something.

fiftysevener

@david3142 said:
Cameo appearance does not strictly matter for the PL or DMPL designation. It is only the depth of mirrors, although it does help make them look better and maybe helps a bit for that reason.

Most 21st century Morgans have very little contrast except generally 04-O and sometimes 01-O.

You mean 20th century Morgans right ?

FlyingAl

@150K said:
FlyingAl just curious how you can tell they are from the same die?
It's always good to learn something.

The denticles on the left side obverse shows the same clash pattern.

I think that’s a clash - I’d need to double check. Regardless, it’s a die feature.

Morgan13

This is the sellers images. The mirrors are such that you can see yourself in them. I have many DMPL coins and these mirrors are no different. But I have faith PCGS will grade the coin accurately.

david3142

@fiftysevener said:

@david3142 said:
Cameo appearance does not strictly matter for the PL or DMPL designation. It is only the depth of mirrors, although it does help make them look better and maybe helps a bit for that reason.

Most 21st century Morgans have very little contrast except generally 04-O and sometimes 01-O.

You mean 20th century Morgans right ?

Yes, of course. I actually had 20th written and then I changed it because my brain stopped working. 😃

BigAl

May I ask what you paid and where you purchased the coin from, ie）ebay? 21’s in Dmpl are tough to come by. Wish you the best of luck, please keep us posted on grades

Torey

They expect Frost

JRocco

My thoughts have been to hold a ruler in front of the coin and if you can see the 6 inch marking in the reflection in the coins fields it is a DMPL.

alefzero

20th Century prooflike Morgans (i.e. 1900-1904 and 1921) do not typically exhibit device-to-field contrast, or cameo.

Never know where the grading services are at any given time on this, but I have had absolute (to me) prooflike crossovers rejected for things like a tiny (as minted) planchet flake by the denticles (a 1904-S NGC 65DMPL or 65PL, I forget which), toning, and interruption in the field mirrors.

ProofCollection

My test is that with one hand I hold a lottery ticket next to my face (chosen because it has a nice text pattern) and then I hold the coin in front of me at varying distances. Do this with slabbed DMPL and PL Morgans and some non-PL Morgans and you'll get a feel really quick what to look for.

AUandAG

Whatever it grades, I'd still like it. I remember reading that pre 1900, the dies used could produce about 100 dmpls before the mirrors were lost due to die use. Don't know if 1921 is different but I know it's a rare bird for sure.
bob
vegas baby!

telephoto1

You might have a shot at PL but not DMPL imo.

BigAl

Devices do not need to be frosted (or cameo) to designate DMPL. Also if there's frosting in the fields, like you see in Torey's '21 posted above, (see frosting where light hits the field above the 2 stars to the left of the date) it's not DMPL.

Historically, pcgs does not designate DMPL unless both the Obv and Rev are DMPL (not sure if they'll now desig one side DMPL like other TPGs - been a while since I've submitted). So if the Obv is DMPL and the Rev has no mirrors (you see this often in 1878 P), pcgs will not assign a designation. Whereas if the Obv is DMPL and Rev is PL, coin will grade PL.

As for measurement, I just hold my index finger to the field, then move my finger back until blurry. Do this enough and you'll get a feel for the distance needed be gauge b/t pl and dmpl.

Morgan13

@telephoto1 said:
You might have a shot at PL but not DMPL imo.

Why?

Morgan13

I found the images I took of this coin before I shipped it. I had them saved in my phones gallery and not my Google photos. The mirrors are as deep as any dmpl I own.
I know I had images.
Here you go-

ProofCollection

I understand why you are hopeful. The fields are nice. But the second and third photos do not (to me) appear to have the mirror clarity needed for DMPL. You need more than just a smooth glossy field, they also have to reflect without distortion.
Good luck on your submission!

telephoto1

@Morgan13 said:

@telephoto1 said:
You might have a shot at PL but not DMPL imo.

Why?

The mirrors don't look deep enough, assuming the image accurately represents how the coin looks in hand.

Morgan13

We'll see...photos were taken with a cell phone and are pretty blurry. I could see the end of a ruler on both sides. I'm just hopeful that's all. Besides the thread was to ask if a coin needed to have a cameo or frosted devices to male DMPL. I'm not exactly saying this coin will DMPL. I'm saying I am hopeful. If it comes back PL that's still okay with me.

cheezhed

Nice coin I wish you luck.

Cougar1978

Eye Appeal is everything on them. Pieces that are really PQ bring very strong money.

yspsales

Hard to discern in a 2D picture.

Pulling for you.

Morgan13

@yspsales said:
Hard to discern in a 2D picture.

Pulling for you.

That's very nice of you. I hope I get it. Not so much for the money but for my collection.🤞

BigAl

Grade in yet?

Morgan13

I did and it did not come back PL. I still disagree so it's cracked out.