Sorry, I can't, I think the coin has been glazed (I don't know the correct term for it) So the details are naturally unclear.
Perhaps, but the images are not in focus and the lighting is bad. Better images-- and cropped so you don't bog down load time-- will be helpful and may entice members to give it a look, especially given the volume of coins you're posting for identification.
On a side note, it's becoming apparent that photography is a skill we all need for participating in discussions with like-minded people / re-selling coins / getting a good understanding of how coins can appear in photos vs in the hand. How do we all do it? A set-up like Doug's for example? http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/coinphoto2011ez.html
I know it is not an opinion shared by all but being able to produce an image of a coin that shows detail and color within reason is a communication skill just like having a certain degree of writing skill in English (or whatever language is being used in the venue). You can do a lot of talking here on Coin Talk but I'd be more likely to be able to answer an unclearly worded question illustrated with a clear photo than a well worded text with a fuzzy image. We have had people here complain about poor grammar and refusal to pay attention to spelling. It is not my intent to drive off people who have not learned even the most basic photo skills (coin in hand with phone is OK if it is done well) but posting fuzzy images of coins in left in their flips can be interpreted as a way of saying "I really don't care."
It's Constantius II, Spes reverse. Not as common as other LRB's, but not really scarce. Except finding one in a nice grade is a challenge - it was a brief issue that circulated heavily. Here's one of mine...
That last set of images is 100% better. Under the figure is a mint mark. Mine reads SMKB which may be what yours is. Can you make out the letters? The important one is the third (K) in this case for Cyzicus. JA's example is Constantinople.
