I went with 63 DMPL, based on your photo.
Would need to see a few more photos under different lighting to get a better feel on the mirror depth and marks to actually make a better guess.
I showed one of those to Davis Hall once and asked if they were doing them now. He rolled his eyes and made it clear it was a mistake that got through.
@Walkerfan said:
Enough cameo contrast for DMPL and the cheeks are pretty clean but the marks in the field limit it to MS 64, imho.
PL/DMPL designations are based solely on the depth of the mirrored fields. Cameo contrast, if any is present, is irrelevant although cameos tend to garner premiums in the market.
@coindeuce said: "The amount of field chatter in front of Liberty's face makes me call this a "gift" grade."
I disagree but I'm not going to punch the button...LOL. We all know that "chatter" sticks out on a PL surface more than on a frosty surface. AFAIK, the TPGS take that into account. I was surprised that the 63 PL and 64 PL % was equal. That proves that all of us allow chatter on PL coins.
@coindeuce said:
The amount of field chatter in front of Liberty's face makes me call this a "gift" grade.
By seeing this coin in hand as I have, it is very nice for the grade and sweet as all get out. I am still hoping that Fade will someday consider selling it to me
Comments
Looks strong enough for dmpl but a few too many marks to be above MS 62/63
Nice....
bob
Why the selection for 58 DMPL ? Does PCGS even recognize circs. as DMPL ?
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
NGC does.
I went with 63 DMPL, based on your photo.
Would need to see a few more photos under different lighting to get a better feel on the mirror depth and marks to actually make a better guess.
ms64DMPL for me...Very Nice!
NGC does. > @FadeToBlack said:
I showed one of those to Davis Hall once and asked if they were doing them now. He rolled his eyes and made it clear it was a mistake that got through.
Definitely MS67+ ULimate PRoof Designation.
Might go DMPL but I played it safe and guessed PL.
Enough cameo contrast for DMPL and the cheeks are pretty clean but the marks in the field limit it to MS 64, imho.
“I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
63 DMPL
PL/DMPL designations are based solely on the depth of the mirrored fields. Cameo contrast, if any is present, is irrelevant although cameos tend to garner premiums in the market.
Judging from the picture (always risky), the fields seem to have too much chatter for DMPL...Cheers, RickO
Based on the contrast of the fields and the devices in the image, I would say 64DMPL.
Fields are just too rough for higher than 63DMPL
Free Trial
Assuming the images accurately represent the coin in hand, I'd say solid 63DMPL, Shot at a 64 DMPL
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
The amount of field chatter in front of Liberty's face makes me call this a "gift" grade.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
@coindeuce said: "The amount of field chatter in front of Liberty's face makes me call this a "gift" grade."
I disagree but I'm not going to punch the button...LOL. We all know that "chatter" sticks out on a PL surface more than on a frosty surface. AFAIK, the TPGS take that into account. I was surprised that the 63 PL and 64 PL % was equal. That proves that all of us allow chatter on PL coins.
By seeing this coin in hand as I have, it is very nice for the grade and sweet as all get out. I am still hoping that Fade will someday consider selling it to me
I can see why CAC liked it. It's certainly solid for the grade in my opinion as well.
Fade.....
Time for that DMPL give-away!!!