The obverse shows possible signs of having been lightly cleaned at the highpoints/her cheek and forehead. Under normal lighting, it looks like nothing more than bag marks. At an angle/under diffused light, looks like it could have been lightly cleaned. Still within the return window, so I'd like some input input from the community before I definitely return the coin.
Looks PL at best. Is that gouge in the sheek the result of PMD, or a strike through? It does not appear to have displaced metal.
Where do you see a wipe? Above the cap? What does the reverse look like? Edit- oops i must have been just drunk enough to not comprehend last night. The only possible issue i see is a few letters have halo effect, which is usually a clue
Not a DMPL, and has a prominent scratch on the cheek, which makes it a details coin. Get rid of it. It is a "seller's raw DMPL," which means a bright, dipped Morgan. This one has obvious damage.
Thank you all for the input, as always! CT is an awesome resource The coin's indeed dimple given the measurements I'm getting from the obverse mirrors. Still sending back as too many potential problems. Thanks again
It isn't a DMPL because it meets YOUR measurements. You do not get the idea that it isn't only reflectivity that makes for a PL or DMPL coin. Cameo is a major factor with the new standards. You saying that it is DMPL or PL is meaningless-- the only voice that counts in that definition is the TPG. As I see it, the coin might have trouble making PL, given today's stricter standards. It would not grade, due to damage on the face.
Totally off the subject of the thread, but your coin and its pictures are a perfect example of something I tried to explain in another thread not long ago. That being how marks on a given coin can look "black" in one picture, and yet "silver" in another picture - of the very same coin. Unless of course someone else want's to try and tell me that the "black marks" in your pictures are impurities in the planchet
