Options
Identifying PL & DMPL Morgans
newcollect
Posts: 205 ✭✭✭
The last couple of months i have been collecting Morgans, I'm Having one heck of a time determining PL, DMPL.
I know they have to be both sides, have reflective fields Etc. I have done the newsprint thing with the distances, I think my problem is the angle im looking at the coin or the angle of the coin when I put it on my desk, i have to lean over to view it should i raise the coin and look at it at eye level? Any comments on tricks to the trade i would really appreciate it.
I did send 5 off to grading as PL in my mind 3 were not 1 was PL and to my surprize The other as DMPL and has Great Value.
0
Comments
Don't forget the frost on the devices.
Look at a lot of Morgans in PL and DMPL holders. Look at the reflection of your index finger in the surface from various distances. This will help you learn how to gauge mirrors on ungraded coins. Be aware, however, that there are a lot of coins in old holders that are labeled DMPL that would not qualify for PL by today's standards.
Frosty devices on PL coins are normal for the common PL dates, but not for all dates, especially later dates.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Check the archives here... there were some old threads on this topic....also check grading pictures available online and in books. Cheers, RickO
Frost is NOT a factor in determining PL or DMPL and neither is contrast. Messydesk is correct that using your index finger is a good way to go. I also tilt coins and try to read print a few inches away. Look at a LOT of coins but realize that many of them are not properly graded. Eventually, you will be able to develop a gut feeling. Remember when buying that there can be huge variations in prices based on the depth of mirrors and contrast for coins in the same grade. Also, the price spread between PCGS coins and those in other holders is much greater than it is for blast white Morgans.
One little trick, not recommended for public use, is to tape a 3x5 card with 12-pt Times Roman text printed on it to your forehead. Then look at the reflection in the coin's field. That will give you repeatable measurements. You can also make a small slider using a ruler, a binder clip to hold the card, and another clip to connect the first clip to the ruler. Aim the ruler at the coin and sight over the card. Move the card toward or away from the coin until it reaches a point of sharp reflection, then note the distance. (You can do this in public....)
Buy some PL and DMPL Morgans in PCGS Holders to compare with and learn from. 1885-O, 1881-S is not particularly expensive. Speeds up the learning process.
Free Trial
I often find it very difficult to determine PL vs. DMPL accurately on already certified coins because of reflections off the plastic.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Buying raw coins that are PL/DMPL can be very difficult and usually will end up being an expensive lesson.
A lot of raw coins listed on Ebay have had their surfaces manipulated to appear PL. Sending these in for grading they will
come back as altered surfaces and end up in a genuine holder.
If you are just beginning to purchase PL/DMPL coins I would stick to PCGS graded coins. NGC graded coins, as mentioned above do not command as strong of price as PCGS graded coin in PL/DMPL. Also be wary of coins listed for sale that have photos taken at an angle or with unnatural lighting that are trying to make the coin look better than it truly is.
The standards for PL vs DMPL have been "looser" in the past and those coins if submitted today as a raw coin could end up in non PL holder, or a previous DMPL coin only being considered a PL today.
Here is a link to PL/DMPL gauge that may help identify the depth of mirrors.
coingrading.com/plcoins1.html
PCGS has a couple grading books, which is helpful on their standards. What is even better is their 'grading series' videos which can be seen on you-tube.I suggest you watch this one on 'surface'.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=tpEI3TMGzhg
And least we forget...IT DEPENDS ON THE COIN'S DATE AND MINT! Very often coins that ARE DMPL don't get that designation because they need to be unquestionably deep, deep, very deep mirrors to make the DMPL cut for that particular date and mint due to the rarity and value of the coins that make it.
Ain't commercial grading fun? It's no wonder many of us are confused.
There are a lot of variations in PL/DMPL grading. Go to a few local shops and you will get different answers. The fact you made a PL and DMPL is a good sign. For the ones that missed take a good look and see if they really had reflective mirrors or just killer luster. People often mistake luster for mirrors. It helps to learn what dates come what way. An 1880-S to an 1881-S to an 1882-S to an 1883-S are extremely different. An 1880-S comes deep and frosty, an 1881-S is more brilliant, an 1882-S has a weird dishbowl mirror and 1883-S are very rare and mainly one sided PL. There are dates that are almost impossible to make in PL. The pops reports can help you learn what dates are rare.
Happy hunting.
As messydesk noted there are a lot of DMPL coins In older holders that would not qualify today as DMPL. CAC does an excellent job stickering DMPL coins with strong mirrors. Look at some of the DMPL CAC coins to get an idea of what strong mirrors look like and compare them to a PL coin.
You know I forgot about this one,must have read about it years ago i think this one will help me as I know i'm not getting the right angle on the coin to view it. If this works for me the heck with the card i'll just put an X on my forehead and my new handle will be "The X Man"
Just be sure the "X" is 12-point Times Roman... (Not sure how that would go over at a coin show.)
At the last long beach I heard rumors that the TPG's, can't remember which one or if it was in a broad sense, might stop giving PL designations to coins with mirrored surfaces that have heavy polishing lines. Anyone hear about anything like this?
...that company will never holder a 1921 PL again if thats the case
1921's don't have the die polish issues that a 79-S or some 80-s will have.
Something more along these lines where you have nice deep mirrors but the polish in the middle reverse takes out the mirrors.
Bottom line is it takes experience. I use the finger reflection test and can tell with pretty high accuracy whether a coin will dmpl at PCGS. Go to a show and look at stabbed pl/dmpl coins, practice applying the test. More difficult gauging via online pics.
If that is true, it is another foot down into the hole of confusion (a much nicer way of putting it).
IMO, @david3142 has demonstrated an understanding of this thread about "mirrored" Morgan's and he has offered us very good advice in his post. However, to then disagree with my post that the depth of reflectivity is treated differently for each date and mint due to their value and rarity by the TPGS's which can be easily confirmed by following his suggestion (look at coins in slabs), attending an advanced grading seminar (or several), or speaking "off-the-record" with professional TPG's, leads me to question my opinion.
I use the finger test also. I have also seen a TPGS finalizer hold a coin in his lap (less light) and rock it back and forth after using his finger and lamp above the table. I guess, whatever works; but IMO, experience and a knowledge of coin prices for DMPL's works best.
Yes, I do disagree that the grading services have different guidelines for different dates and mintmarks. I would caveat that two ways. 1) different dates/MM absolutely have a different look and therefore, an 80-S with similar depth of mirrors as a 1921 will look deeper and with more contrast. I have several PL coins from the late 1890s that have virtually no contrast as well. That's just how they come (ditto my 1902-O PL, which is borderline DMPL).
2) the grading services will take much more care and generally be more conservative with high-value coins. I have seen many questionable DMPLs for common dates. This is also present in the standards for regular coins because the guarantee makes a mistake much more costly.
There's one for you; and thanks for confirming my post that the date and mint do matter.