Two of them. 1873 appears to have been either cleaned or dipped. It's got wear across Liberty as well as half dime on reverse. 1857 looks really nice!
They both appear to have been dipped, but the 1857 has what looks to be secondary toning forming on it in a more advanced manner than the 1873. I would guesstimate an AU grade for each, but they may be AU50 or AU53.
EF45 to AU53 ? They look like a couple AU coins. The photos make them look lack-luster so I'll say AU53 for BOTH of them.
Was the 73 just a weak strike? The Li in liberty is gone and the word Half Dime on the back looks either weak or worn.
I don't know what the Red Book has for AU prices since I do not buy the Red Book. However, current Greysheet has them at- 1857; $48 in EF40 and $110 in AU50 1873; $35 in EF40 and $60 in AU50 Typically, pieces that are dipped sell at weaker prices, but this is far from an ironclad rule.
The 1873 has some pretty severe scratches on it that I had not seen in the first image. You like them and they appear to work for you, so that is good, but they aren't the look that I would suggest to go out and find.
Question for you, when you say that do you mean that the pics are of worse quality, or that the pics make the coin look worse ? I'm asking that question because it brings up an important point. Usually, when a person takes pictures of one of their coins it's because they want to share those pics with others, or ask a question about that coin. And usually most people will try to post pics that show the coin in its best light - meaning it looks as good as it can. That's completely acceptable and I think everybody does the same. And when looking at posted pics you'll quite often read comments like - it looks better in hand, or I just can't quite capture the color or luster, or something along those lines. And yeah, we all have those problems too. The reason for that of course is because pictures can only show you how a coin looks from 1 specific angle, the angle at which the picture was taken. But when we look at coins we hold them and tilt them and roll them under the light in order to see luster, color, or the lack thereof. Thus we are looking at the coin at many, many, different angles in order to see those things. And these angles only have to change by a degree or two to make the coin look completely different. At a given angle you can see color or luster, a scratch or a contact mark, and at a different angle you can't see them at all. Well pictures are exactly the same way. They only show you what you can see at that specific angle. And sometimes it's what we want to see and sometimes it's what we don't want to see. And that makes pictures a valuable tool for all of us, but more so for the owner of the coin. Because it allows us, forces us even, to see things that we probably didn't want to see at all. Maybe even things we missed when we looked at the coin in hand. And we all have to realize something, we have to realize that while pictures may not always show you a positive or a negative aspect of the coin because of the angle at which the pic was taken, pictures cannot ever show you something that is not really there on the coin. If you can see it in a picture, then it is there on the coin. And the fact that you may not really notice it when looking at the coin in hand doesn't matter - it is there. So use your pictures as a tool, especially those pictures which when you look at them you might say to yourself - that looks terrible ! Or those pictures look much worse than the others. For those are the pictures that will show you what you need to see, what you didn't or don't want to see. In other words pictures that show you the faults of a coin are more valuable to you as the owner than those pictures that show the coin in its best light. Those are the pictures that will teach you, and help you learn how to see things you might miss when looking at a coin in hand. And that can be invaluable when looking at coins you want to buy in the future
Make the photo look like the coin in hand The art of taking a good photograph is to make the photo look like the coin in hand. One of our members told me that it is really important especially if you are selling coins because it lowers your return rate. It is difficult to do justice to a coin with just one photo (& I am far from good at it myself). Obviously, the new photos depict both coin's surfaces in a different light. I suspect that the coins look something in between the 1st & 2nd photo set. Based upon all the photos, I'd change my grade opinion from AU53 to EF details.
Well, that is exactly the issue I was discussing. Every pic posted by the OP does look like the coin in hand, so does every pic posted by anybody. (Excepting photo-shopped pictures of course.) But a picture, any picture, can only show you how the coin looks in hand from 1 specific angle. Example, here's a coin I used to own, 2 sets of pictures same exact coin, taken at the same time. Only difference is a very slight change in the angle. Now most people if they looked at those 2 sets of pictures would never believe it was the same coin. But it is.
Same thing really. A picture can be deemed to be "worse" because it shows the flaws of the coin more readily, or because it does not show the positive aspects as well as it might. With coin pictures it can go either way, or both ways even. That is the nature of pictures because that is the nature of our vision. In order to see everything about a coin you must look at it under a good light while tilting and turning the coin, rolling it under the light. It is only in this way that we can see all aspects of the coin, both good and bad. It is only by looking at the coin from many different angles that we can see these things. That is why the advice is given to always buy a coin when you can examine it in hand. Because if you don't examine it in hand, there may easily be things about the coin you will wish you had been able to see - good or bad things.
