Determining a VAM from bad photos...

Like a good cop, sometimes you must work with the evidence you have. With that in mind, consider these bad photos your evidence in solving the crime, which we will call the VAM.

VAM Detectives, detective away!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm thinking EDS of v37 from what I can make out

 

I'm thinking Vam 34, but my vision is quite blurry, so the photos aren't helping matters

 

No polishing lines in the tailfeathers

 

Blurry Heavy ? Heck Miller time must of started earlier today?

 

The only polishing I see, is me, polishing off a few more Millers before bed

 

Now it's time to ask .....a Heavy question......how many Miller's = 1 Morgan Silver Dollar?
To take it up a notch how any Miller's = a MS 65 Morgan .
Next let's ask how many Miller's = a DMPL Morgan?
How about a very rare Vam Morgan ? How many Miller's ?
Now here's a easy one how many Miller's does it take to make a 4G Morgan look like a DMPL?

 

I'm thinkin' I need another bourbon...........no I don't. Time to eat. On the 'morrow friends.

 

1) 1 case
2) 7 cases
3)10 cases
4) 20 cases
5) a case and a half plus a smidgen of sour mash straight from KY

 

This is a VAM-DMPL-R1-PL

 

No such thing as an R1 lol

 

My booze disagrees.

 

Relatively trivial.

The reverse says 36/37 - you can see the one farther spike coming off the bottom of the arrow fletches, and the dual "splotches" of detail under the olive branch, which are characteristic of just this reverse (shared by the two VAMs). So it becomes a game of deciding which obverse it is.

Which is even more trivial. Is the 4th right star broken? VAM-37. Is it not (or just slightly) broken? VAM-36. The image seems to indicate a broken star, but it isn't conclusive. So we look for two other easy pickups for V37, just to confirm: bulges on the upper crossbar of the E and upper right of the P of E * P. In addition, V36 ought to have a fairly prominent die chip at the top outside of the eye, were V37 does not.

There's nothing about a poor image which prohibits you from importing it and blowing it up in postprocessing to look for things like this.

So what did I find when I did so?

 

You found it's something completely different?

 

No, Cascade got it right the first time, as usual. I just want people to start doing this for themselves, rather than waiting for the rest of us to spoon-feed them.

 

Yup. That's basically what I did except instead if importing and playing with images I used my phone and zoomed in on the areas. Took all of sub 5min. Did I mention I rather loathe photo vamming to a certain extent. Much more fun when they are in hand

 

Yes, but photo VAMming is where the real cherrypicks lie.

The ability to discern details from images which others cannot or will not is what separates the "discoverers" from those who simply look for the details you've already handed them. It's your head start on the competition, and broadens the available market for your purchases by an order of magnitude.

Indeed, in many cases sufficiently broad to offer a few to your friends.

 

Its hard to do all the above with photos when all you have is a phone you barely know how to use. Technology is a crutch when you are over 35.

 

Is there good book on vams with large color photos for those of us with bad eyes? I have no problem researching myself but it's hard switching screens back and forth.

 

Agreed. I just find it more fun in hand.