What Are These Deposits In This 1880-S?

Having little to no depth perception in the photos, that looks like uneven toning. The S mint mark may have taken a hit or the die may have been damaged.

The mint mark appears to be doubled in the die.
The globby stuff might be jeweler's solder when the coin was in a pendant.

First: No tampering; it is graded 64+ by PCGS. I'd show the numbers, but people tend to copy them these days for valuable or interesting ones.

After looking harder, I think it is some kind of odd clashed die with the extra metal (silver, or I am not sure)

If you look at all the irregularities, on either side, mark where they would be on a clock. then add 6 hours. Then go to the other side (if you started on obv., go to reverse). "6 hours later" there is always something there that matches up (not perfectly -- clashes never do) with the anomaly on the first side.

What if the metal is from a vvlds? Can we use the S/S to determine the stage? The thing is, the earlier the die stage, the better-looking the coin (usually), and I doubt a 64+ would have been given to a coin struck on a die so used...

Also, on our right: the 2nd, 3rd and 4th star appear to be doubled. On our left: the last two stars also appear to be doubled.

An interesting coin should be worth the time of whomever finds it interesting, but I know I am new here, so I posted the coin in the holder, in case a small few of the community was thinking I was pulling their leg.

No, clashed dies would be seen as raised lines usually, not blobs.

Here's a clashed die for you.



Maybe I am reading into the fact that they line up so well, so as to seem like a clashed die. If it was once or twice, or three times even, I'd say it's not. But pick any Desposit, and look for something on the other side in its place. It's always there.

send it to messydesk, avid vamworld attributionist
.... I know you mean well but your photo's are missing some of the most basic things......like the basic clashings of front and back not just a MS64 listing....
asyou are new and excited as we all are lol
EVEN NOW
the reason we recheck some of the most basic things are that they could tend to lead to other possibilities, thats why the fundamentals are the basis of where we turn to to provide absolute identification....your pictures are kind of disfuntional.....the picurres are grreat!! ecept when I look at the OBverse, I see no neck clashing.....you can't have nose and head clashing without the neck..clashing. not no neck clashing..1 example is the VAM 1878 VAM 33a.. neck is clearly seen you have to look for the nose and chin clashing.the neck is a no brainer.... .100 or more examples are KNOWN, FIRST and formost... when I was new to vaming I posted the things....I thought were important..
they were to a point but the critical facts were not here..as is yours....discolorization over the date plays into question the VAM 37B.......the denticle impresstions buy some means are not seen but discolorred...they almost look like a Cud but the denticles are in full view
.....I will tell you thins, the your coin is from a used die.not a new but not far gone but getting close..the grains upon the surface are far from new..
it is the discolorization that has my mind going.....as your points of interest or the colored areas can not be Cuds....the denticles are CLEAR...not over run and now part of the Cud.
It's the pictures produced in the order presented...I could just be retarded and haven't a clue
but I just can't see that the coin has no real VAM-WAM points you must understand.......most coins start from the most basic outrageous abnormalities......the doubling..the clashing.....the clashes with die rotaIONS.....ECT
EST,/enough.......ONCE I LIVED here at this site to help people understand vams......NOT CHASE AROUND searching for VAM POOP

AS far as sending it into VAN ALLEN go for it...your pictures don't lend me an ear to your cause but thats ok....