Dimefreak - DMPL Toner

Raider, this quote was taken out of context. It was discussing the cameo contrast and limited reflectivity that is necessary for Semi-PL and PL coins and had nothing to do with DMPL coins.

I think the point the author was trying to make was that if these standards were not met on both obverse and reverse, the Semi-PL or PL designation could not be given.

Chris

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Dime, that was my mistake. Sorry! Just use the white paper and ruler. Yes, you must be able to read the numeric gradations on the ruler.

Chris

 

What date/mm and grade?

Chris

 

Ok, so here's the entire paragraph:

Imo it's pretty clear the author believes cameo contrast is a requirement.
And if that isn't enough, scroll to the bottom of the page where eBay coins are discussed, and look at coin #3. The author states:

While I do agree the coin is polished, it appears the author is looking for cameo contrast as one of the requirements.

 

Right! I should have taken my horse blinders off. I was thinking that you were speaking merely in terms of reflectivity.

Here is a page from the NGC site where DPL and Cameo are discussed in separate paragraphs (about 6-7 down).

Chris
http://www.ngccoin.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?NewsletterNewsArticleID=341

 

Whoa whoa, an apology? Really? I am not a person to shy away from that if it's needed. It certainly isn't needed. I was the first poster to reply to you guys. No one had a clue what you guys were talking about. So obviously the first two posts stemmed from a conversation you guys where having elsewhere.
Why dies me coming from Canada have ANYTHING to do with this?? And why would this thread have to go into the "world coin" area??
It had nothing to do with Canada, or the world coin forum.

 

Snaz he was joking...see the laughing men at the end of his post...lol

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't U.S. coins considered foreign coins in Canada. Don't bother ducking.

And yes, you jumped the gun an made an incorrect assumption about where the thread should be placed without even knowing anything about our conversation. If not, then why did you ask that the mods do something about it? For all you know, our conversation could have been over the phone, via e-mail or snail mail for that matter. I didn't realize that we had to clear that with you first.

However, if it makes you happy, I will retract my acceptance of your apology.

Chris

 

For starters Chris, why didn't you send him that picture in a private message? It is very easy to start a photobucket account, which is absolutely free, and once the image is uploaded, find the code that is marked and copy and paste that. It will show up in a private message. And if ya' didn't know, you know now.

Snaz, I kinda agree with you, on the one hand it was like a personal message out on the forums singling out one member while the other members just looked at the thread, confused. There is no need for apologies by either one of you. Snaz was in the right asking the mods to put this post into whatever thread it belonged in, but although, was it really that big of a deal? Was this thread hurting anyone? And do I honestly think that this thread would've gotten deleted. I really don't, and don't know that I care all that much.
Sure, me and raider made the thread more interesting on page 1 of the thread, which probably warranted a reason for this thread to be here in the first place, versus this thread being two posts, when there didn't even need to be a thread at all.

Both of you guys need to chill before this thing gets out of hand. If either one of you has a reply directly toward me, why not just PM it to me? Lets keep the forum about coins, and if you two still want to talk about apologies and the origin of this thread, do it in private, not here.

 

No. You seem to be confused. Next time... Post the response IN THE THREAD that it originated from. If we all made new threads everytime we wanted to reply to someone the forum would make NO sense.

 

What part of it didn't originate in a thread dont you understand???????????

Step 1- I PM'd Chris with a question
Step 2- Chris started a thread to show me because he uses the direct upload feature for his pictures.
Step 3- You came along assuming we were talking about a thread.
Step 4- We try to explain.
Step 5- You came along assuming we were talking about a thread.
Step 6- I try explaining again

 

Well then substitute "thread" for "PM" same thing!
Don't get hung up on the little details.

 

In returning to the OP - it is very hard to get NGC to recognize DMPL, or even PL, with toning. A well toned DMPL is incredibly rare, and worth a significant premium in higher grades or "moose" status. I only own one PL toner, as photo'd by Bob. The coin is just barely a PL, and probably is more like a semi-PL:

 

Jason,

It appears that there is enough untoned surface on the obverse field of your coin for the grader to make the determination. I wonder how much would be considered "enough"? 10%? 20%? 25%?

Chris

 

But if bright enough, the toning can be reflective, no?
What I think is funny about his coin is that the most PL areas I see are the toned areas. From those photos, I'd say no PL at all, but I'd love to see the coin in hand versus viewing photos.
I think to determine what is enough though, I think the nearly the whole thing could be toned, as long as the toning wasn't all that splotchy, or dark. If it was bright, vibrant toning, one would think that the reflectivity of the coin wouldn't be all that damaged, although, this is an experiment I haven't tried yet, just all in my head as a thought.

 

You are pretty much correct, T$. The most PL areas in hand are the ones with toning. I think the coin is impeded by the plethora of marks in the fields, and determining prooflike status on this coin is impeded by that more than anything. I have seen very high grade, well toned coins called DMPL, and the mirrors shone through the toning - they are indeed spectacular.

My coin, if resubmitted, would lose the PL I'm guessing.