1878 7TF Reverse Pic

messydesk

Shot this getting ready for a January software release. 1878 VAM 140 reverse glam shot.

dwssws

pic won't load for me

Ducky1100

Looks almost like a hand drawn pencil sketch.

REAL NICE.

coindeuce

John, try uploading your image to photobucket.com, then copy & paste to here.

messydesk

Here's the image photobucketed for those that couldn't load it earlier.

DennisH

Nice photo John!!

Stuart

John: That's a really nice image. I have taken the liberty to reduce the brightness and sharpen it up a bit, and have produced the following for your viewing pleasure and comment:

Myqqy

I love the first year morgan design- they must have polished the crap out of that die!

Coxe

Will there be a lot of detail pics for each variety on the release? For instance, for this variety, the reverse details, besides the open o, that are relevant to locking in the attribution I don't see easily in your image, though it is very nice. Here are three from a cleaned AU I have for VAM-140.

messydesk

The VAM 140 can be found PL. This coin is actually cleaned, as well, which would show in a non-glam shot. Many 1878 Reverse of '78 have heavily polished reverse dies, moreso than this one.

Regarding the darker, sharpened picture, one thing it loses is details in the dark areas of the coin. These two histograms show that the darkened image has all its dark pixels compressed against the low end of the dynamic range. The upper end is spread out more, but the idea of a glam shot like this is to blow out the fields a little and hide some of the imperfections, making the coin look really nice (always view Goldberg auction lots in person). If I were to buy this coin given my picture, I'd return it, but that's not the purpose of my picture in this case.

Edited to add the histograms I was talking about:

Coxe

<< <i>(always view Goldberg auction lots in person) >>



AMEN! That is exactly what I thought of when I saw your pic at first. Never understood the raving about their catalogues because of this very point. I can't buy coins from those online or print catalogue images and I really have to want to consider a coin or coins to make the 2 hour drive up to BH to view lots.

messydesk

<< <i>Will there be a lot of detail pics for each variety on the release? For instance, for this variety, the reverse details, besides the open o, that are relevant to locking in the attribution I don't see easily in your image, though it is very nice. Here are three from a cleaned AU I have for VAM-140. >>


VAM 140 is one variety for which there are probably two reverses, one of which should probably really be "VAM 147," but there hasn't been a push to do this. My coin doesn't have the die scratches yours does. It does have some finer ones inside the eagle's upper left leg, but that's about it. Not even any die cracks. Pictures will have to wait until my batteries recharge. Further in-depth analysis will be required to determine if they are actually different dies or if the gouges in yours were added in servicing the die.

The 7TF Wizard will have many pictures for each variety in addition to one or two key pictures that are used to arrive at a quick attribution. I took about 900 pictures of Jeff Oxman's coins, plus I have others I'll be using as well.

Coxe

Someday, more of us need to combine efforts. There is a lot going with that obverse: VAM-116, VAM-140, VAM-199.2....maybe even VAM-112? We need a enough high grade (AU and MS) duplicate specimens of each alleged variety in one place to make sense of it all.

messydesk

VAM 199.2 is gone. It has now become VAMs 116B and 116C. Former VAM 116 is now VAMs 116 and 116A. There are various stages of die scratches and clashes that come and go, but the die cracks link them all together.

DennisH

John and John:

I have examples of what are supposedly VAM 116 and 140 in MS63. Anything I should look for in particular to continue this thread?

Oops... I just looked at my "VAM 140". It has none of the die gouges seen in John C's photos -- but it matches up perfectly with the two photos shown in Leroy's May 2007 7TF Attribution Guide.

Coxe

It's hard to figure these out as you know, Dennis. I was looking at what I thought was cleaning and it looks like they just really scrubbed the die. My coin still is scratched anyway. There are a lot of die scratches and gouges on that reverse. One of the more interesting locations, which I am not sure is documented anywhere, is below the E of ONE. There is a series of six little wisps.

BIGJAYVEE

Excellent pics,but even better,the discussions about the Vam in the pic from the guys that know.Wish we had a lot more threads like this.Thanks for sharing.

DennisH

John C: I'm really baffled by your VAM 140 photos and the die gouges between and around the eagle's legs. Does your coin also have the two key obverse diagnostics illustrated in Leroy's new 7TF book (the big doubling 'bump' on the nose of the P in PLURIBUS, and the die chip to the right of the eye near the hair?)

Speaking of baffled... Why does Leroy's book give the same diagnostics for both VAM 116 and 140? Wouldn't that mean they're the same VAM? After looking at my VAM 116 and 140 (at least that's what I used to think they were), it turns out they're the same coin, per the obverse diagnostics illustrated in Leroy's new 7TF book. And since one of the coins is attributed in an ANACS holder as a 116 and I think the world of John Roberts, I guess that means I have two 116s.

Except the ANACS coin has extensive reverse die cracking that links nearly all of the letters except DOLLAR and runs through the tips of both wings.. The PCGS coin, however, has none. That said, it's also semi-PL and has a moderately 'dished' appearance to the reverse. Could the absence of the cracks just mean it is a much earlier die state? (By the way, most of the reverse denticles look to be doubled, especially from about 10 o'clock to 4 o'clock.)

Any ideas here?

anablep

messydesk: Love the image of that reverse... WoW!!

messydesk

116, 140, and former 199.2 share the same obverse. Leroy eliminated VAM 199.2 after his book came out. There are apparently two reverses for VAM 140, but Leroy doesn't differentiate between them. I looked at the VAM 140 pictures I took of Jeff's coin and they match mine. John C., I'd love to borrow your gougy one for study and inclusion in the 7TF CD. Hopefully, I can determine if they are two different reverse dies (which I would then argue should be 140 and 147) or two die states (which should be 140 and 140A). The scratched up reverse dies are fairly rampant in 1878, especially 116, 141, 143 (same reverse die as 145). Funny that you don't see this abuse on the obverse, since it must just be some random grit that found its way to the die while it was beign polished.

Dennis, all VAM 116s have die cracks around the reverse, even the earliest ones. My VAM 140 has none, so I'd bet your PCGS semi PL coin is a VAM 140. The open 'o' in God can be hard to see at times, since there is a trace of "connective tissue" that remains. Mine shows up best with really flat lighting.

Coxe

Dennis, the apparent difference between the 116 and the 140 is in the reverse die used. The 140 has a clearly open o in the motto.

I have neglected the 1878 and 1921 dates for most of the couple decades of doing Morgans, more than many VAM collectors have at least. So the number of specimens to analyze is pretty low and many VAMs I haven't seen. It would be nice to have several high grade specimens to view side by side and hash out what is really going on. There is still a lot of be learned from the higher production B and C reverse 1878 VAMs. Check your 140 to be sure the reverse does indicate a 140. The tooling of the dies may have been midproduction or maybe you have a 116 variety there instead.

DennisH

"The 140 has a clearly open o in the motto."

OK, upon closer examination the PCGS coin that I'd thought was a 140... probably is. Its O is open. On the ANACS VAM 116, however, it is more or less closed.

But my VAM 140 has none of the cool reverse gouges seen in John C's coin.