Photos can give you a pretty good idea as to what a coin will grade. That coin looks like a very low end 66 and seeing it in hand probably wouldn't change that.
Thanks TM I have a new camera that why some are dark and thing like that.and have not got it set right yet the camera that died I had 5-6 yr& 99% of my photo were taken with it but not the 1879-S that the new one. this 85-O was shot with the old camera
ok but it still doesnt change the fact that both 79-s Pictures on the first page are not the same coin
post a closeup of the obverse and reverse. Both pictures have different contact marks around the coin. Just saying...
When I get time to go get it out of my SD box at the bank .I will shot the hole thing again. but don't hold your breath.just saying
It is still hard to believe that these two are the same coins. Yes, it looks like you took them with different angles and lighting which can change everything in a photo. I, like Marauderrt10 would like to see photos of the obverse and the reverse of the graded coin, when you have the time.
I didn't want to say it when I first saw it, but I had a hard time finding comparison between the 2 pics (raw vs slabbed) In particular are the marks on the cheek, mark just under PL in PLURIBUS, and the diagonal hairline from the N in UNUM. Also, there was no indication of the frostiness of the coin in the raw pics, but the slabbed coin has great contrast between clean fields and the frosty details... just love Morgans like that. If they turn out to be different coins, then I'm sure it was an honest mistake, but if they are the same, then it really just proves the point that grading from pics is dang near impossible.
The end:dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse::dead-horse:
No, not even close to the end. With out answering the questions we have asked with photos of the slabbed coin in high quality, like the photos in the original post, you have ended nothing.
Come on jello... don't leave us hanging. I've been following this thread waiting for your updates since the other day when folks started asking about the differences. This is a good excuse to use your new camera...
Well that is an interesting photo. The area where that big hit on the cheek was in the first coin appears to not be on this coin. Jello, would you mind telling us what the cheek looks like in hand? From the beginning of the mouth to the eye looks very washed out, edited almost.
Maybe I am getting too in depth with this, but I think your last photo is the same as the first set of photos you provided. Meaning, it is not the same as your MS66. I circled in red the placements of a few marks on a photo from the first set you saved, and I did the same with your "latest" photo. First, there is the big hit from the mouth to about the eye. You can see it in the first photo, but not in the second. In fact, in the second photo that area looks un-natural and edited. Second, to the right of the big mark in both photos there are two noticeable marks. A very long and skinny one and slightly above it a shorter one. Jello, I hate to say it, but with everything you've shown, I've come to this conclusion. The first set of pictures are the same coin as your latest photo. On the other hand, the slabbed coin you pictured is not the same as the other coin. This leads me to believe two things. 1. The slabbed coin isn't your coin. 2. You re-shot the first coin, originally posted, and you edited out the big problem area
ther No hits on cheek Feed back from plastic holder and lop to camera . once I turned it to B&W it goes away.
Oh really? How about reading the post below again. Jello, you still have yet to prove anything at all. The coin in the slab and the coin in your first set are completely different. And the latest photo is the same as the coin in the first set. You may think we are beating a dead horse in this situation, but in reality we aren't.