Distance for DMPL?

Saw this listing and the seller claims it should be DMPL (Deep Mirror Proof-Like) cause the distance of reflection is "30-40 inches" from the surface.

Is this something that professional graders actually do to determine DMPL? (measure distance of clarity on reflections off the surface of the coin)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Haha, 30-40 inch mirrors is simply hyperbole. That is ridiculous.

However, yes, the basic idea of Prooflike versus Deep Prooflike is how "deep" the mirrors are. A "shallow" mirror will show clear reflectivity from a couple of inches away, a deeper mirror will show clear reflectivity from farther away.

There is no real clear, defined standard for how many "inches of reflectivity" are required for each designation, but you'll often hear people talk about 2-3 inches for PL, 5-6 or more for DPL. There is also some variation based on date - some dates are known for their highly reflective surfaces, and so might be judged a little more strictly.

A good way to measure this at home is by using a ruler held perpendicular to the surface of the coin. Look at how far away you can clearly read the increments, and that's your measure of reflectivity. You can do the same thing with a newspaper, or any reasonably sized printed text. How far away can you read it? That's how deep the mirrors are.

In the grading room, the graders do not use these sorts of methods. They have seen hundreds and thousands of PL and DPL coins. They will often use their thumb or a finger, holding it over a coin and see how sharp the reflection is. They are usually pretty good at judging PL/DPL based on this. This is easier to do with raw coins than slabbed ones, of course.

As for the coin in your link - that is definitely PL, and definitely not DPL. The seller is just making up stuff to add hype, and hopefully lure someone in.

 

But not 1990 "no S" non-proof cents right? If it's a 1990 cent and a little "shinny", they're on here in a nanosecond.

 

Sharing my experience here...
The BEST way for me to tell if a coin will DMPL is, it has to have what I call "raised, liquid fields." By that, I mean it looks like water suspended on the surface. Also, that liquid surface has to be largely unbroken. I don't use inches of mirrors or credit card reflections or any of that. The TPG'S are too inconsistent with that method. Look for that liquid appearance and it will DMPL every time.

 

But don't make the coin wet.

 

You may wet your britches when you find a true DMPL.

 

Here is a link to the most recent press release, which you mentioned, from PCGS concerning PL/DMPL: https://www.pcgs.com/news/pcgs-adds-pl-and-dmpl-designations

Searching back, I see nowhere that PCGS ever states 8 inches as the minimum.

In fact, if you read their published grading guide (from 2004), you'll see exactly the same 2-4 inches for PL, 6 inches for DPL. (For those reading along at home, this is on page 75): https://smile.amazon.com/Official-Guide-Grading-Counterfeit-Detection/dp/0375720502/ref=smi_www_rco2_go_smi_g5171374337?_encoding=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0&ie=UTF8

I don't have the first edition from 1997, if someone who has it could check and verify that it's the same? There may have been some stricter requirements in the very early days, but all the published information I can find says the same 6 inches. Other authors who have written about DMPL Morgans have advocated for tighter standards, but none were officially implemented.

How strictly PCGS interprets the standards may have changed over time, but the published standard has always been the same from what I can find.

NGC has not published the distances they use. I've asked them, and they have told me they won't share that information. The most detailed explanation you'll get from NGC is here: https://coinweek.com/education/coin...rading-from-ngc-prooflike-and-deep-prooflike/

No, they don't. And they never did.

Old ANACS, back when they used the small white holders had an UDM, with higher requirements (12 inches). But those are extremely rare to find.

As for how they do it, they look at the reflection of their finger above the surface. None of them get out a ruler and measure it. Both PCGS and NGC use the same method.

To see exactly how they do it, watch this clip of Scott Schecter from NGC actually grading a PL coin. Jump straight to 2:37 for the PL part, or watch the whole video (which is really informative):

 

Yup, so glad to see this corrected. Thanks, PF-pi. I am so sorry, but I cannot imagine from which orifice Doug pulls half of this stuff, but I do have my suspicions.

 

Not to mention it's been what 2 decades since they used that?

 

Precisely. Apparently having a chief mod who has been in suspended animation for an undetermined number of decades is a dual-edged sword. LOL. Who knew?

Anyone remember the "TPGS firms prefer soft flips" allegation? I do.

Sorry, but this is NOT a hobby where one can fail to constantly keep up to modern changes. It CREATES what is at best a historical perspective, and at worst, rampant misinformation.

 

I agree. One thing almost everyone agrees with is that the PL/DMPL has tightened up as time has gone on not loosen like he was saying.

 

Anacs still uses the the UDM designation. The yellow holders will occasionally have it noted (they even note one-sided UDMs). They are fairly scarce though.

http://www.anacs.com/contentPages/FAQServices.aspx

 

You really believe that lives up to that? Just saying

 

Yes; the obverse mirrors were 12+ inches in hand. Multiple people who saw it in hand agreed with the UDM.

 

Interesting. I didn't actually know the UDM designation survived the soap-bar era. Thanks for sharing that!

 

Sure thing

 

You’re welcome!

Here’s a video too; not the greatest but it gets the idea across.

https://instagram.com/p/BpYLDgAAVWQ/

 

Disagree. Plenty of coins show that especially normal DMPL and even PL at that distance.

If their special designation is supposed to be a foot at no point was it close to a foot away.