Proof & prooflike coins with luster/cartwheels

Baylor8670

I was looking at a couple of my PL coins and thought about something I read a while back. Can't remember the source but the author said that luster and reflectivity are generally mutually exclusive. IIRC, the logic was that flowlines hurt reflectivity. Does this make sense or am I misremembering?

I'm no expert on assessing luster but both of these have pretty strong cartwheels imho. Is this common for coins that meet the high PL standards of CAC (the quarter has a green bean) & PCGS?

Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts.

DisneyFan

You are on the right track regarding "luster and reflectivity are generally mutually exclusive."

Congratulations on the Hawaiian getting a green bean. The CAC confirms the grade only. It does not confirm the + or the PL.

CACG is very tough on acknowledging +s or PLs which need to be on both sides, obverse and reverse.

P0CKETCHANGE

@DisneyFan CAC does evaluate the designation (in this case, PL).

DisneyFan

@P0CKETCHANGE said:
@DisneyFan CAC does evaluate the designation (in this case, PL).

That may have changed.

I have an 9/20/2020 e-mail from CAC discussing PLs that states,
"We only award stickers based on the numeric grade."

P0CKETCHANGE

@DisneyFan said:
That may have changed.

I have an 9/20/2020 e-mail from CAC discussing PLs that states,
"We only award stickers based on the numeric grade."

I believe that’s just their phrasing to explain ignoring plus grades. Otherwise, they’d be ignoring PL, DMPL, FB, FBL, CAM, DCAM, BN, RB, RD, FH, FS, etc. Perhaps it was a miscommunication.

RobertScotLover

@P0CKETCHANGE said:

@DisneyFan said:
That may have changed.

I have an 9/20/2020 e-mail from CAC discussing PLs that states,
"We only award stickers based on the numeric grade."

I believe that’s just their phrasing to explain ignoring plus grades. Otherwise, they’d be ignoring PL, DMPL, FB, FBL, CAM, DCAM, BN, RB, RD, FH, FS, etc. Perhaps it was a miscommunication.

That is also my understanding too