***Is it just me or does this DMPL look quite a bit like a Proof?

SeattleSlammer

linky

AUandAG

No, 4th thru 6th star to right of date are much too weak for a proof. Hair detail
is too weak as well.

bob

SeattleSlammer

One heck of a cameo, though, assuming the pics are accurate.

AUandAG

Yesssir, that's for sure and I thought that 64 was really knocking it down a notch.

bob

Dog97

Looks better than most of the spotted, stained, barfed on impaired rejects we see on TT & eBay.

sweetwilliet

I followed that coin on ebay, but didn't bid, as I have my $$ tied up in a not so good transaction at the moment.
Did you get it?

coinguy1

<< <i>No, 4th thru 6th star to right of date are much too weak for a proof. Hair detail
is too weak as well.

bob >>

I don't think the coin looks like a Proof, but weak stars and/or weak hair don't necessarily disqualify a Morgan dollar as such.

Below is an image of a Proof 1882 Morgan Dollar - note the weak stars And I have seen many Proof Morgans with relatively weak hair detail.

ColonelJessup

Feldini is OTM (on the money) with his observation that many proof Morgans are not fully struck. Seems most prevalent on 1890-93 issues.

In this particular case NFW

mumu

The OP pictures look very played with.

ricko

Trying to judge such a distinction from the photograph would be very difficult.... that being said, I would tend to think it is not a proof. Cheers, RickO

SeattleSlammer

The OP pictures look very played with.


I'm not seeing what you're seeing.....how so?

sweetwilliet

To me, it looks like a nice cameo dmpl. I think what may make it have the look of a proof is the toning deep in the crevices of the hair detail, which makes the strike appear stronger and that of a proof due to the contrast provided by that tone. There is a little haze it appears on the reverse, which makes me think the mirrors must really be "all there" to reflect thru the haze. Just my 2 cents.

AUandAG

Thanks Mark, I never quit learning!

bob

mumu

<< <i>The OP pictures look very played with.


I'm not seeing what you're seeing.....how so? >>



I am seeing contrast and color temp adjustments that make the coin look more frosty than it really is. If you zoom the pic you can disect some areas of weak frost in the stars around 7am, the lettering from 11-1am and several splotches around the face and and neck. Also I think they contrasted out a lot of frost leak into the fields. I know individually these things dont neccesarily disqualify a proof per se but I think together they are producing that overall cleaner look to trick the eye.

WoodenJefferson

if I tip my lap top monitor back, the PCGS label turns a neon blue along with the cameo, when I do the same thing with the NGC, the label and coin just get creamier. Something is off balance in the OP's image that is creating something that is not as strong as it would naturally appear.