Coinbuf

I've never used Nitric acid so I'll take your word for it, but I really don't see how any acid that eats away at the metal is capable of preserving the details with the level of sharpness we see in the op's original photos. The new photo posted today does show the pebbly surface that I would expect from an acid, but I'd still like a weight.

Are you sure its silver Mike? We don't even know the date. @Marvel Maddness Welcome to the forum, please in the future provide a properly oriented cropped photo of both sides of any coin you have a question about. From your only photo I see a proof coin that was spent into circulation and is now what is called an impaired proof. This has taken away any numismatic value the coin had and its value is $.25.

Correct that there are none in the NGC census as PF70 or PF70CAM, there is however one in PF70UCAM, I wonder if this is a mechanical error? Also quite odd to only have one given the large number graded as PF70DCAM at PCGS.

Opps you are correct I looked at the price guide line. That is quite a bunch and seems like the supply should be more than sufficient to meet demand, I wonder why people are bidding these up so high.

A decent buy for sure, the last few major auction results are around $165, but the last 6 to sell at GC are much closer to this result averaging $120. Also, PCGS has graded 180 at the 70DCAM grade, so not overly rare.

None of the "W" quarters are "rare" in the real sense. Yes they were a slightly low mintage, but these quarters were hunted and saved in high grade and high numbers, they will never truly be rare. That doesn't mean that it has no value, even circulated AU55ish examples like the one the op found are worth $5 or so, not a bad price appreciation over face for such a new issue just not rare.

Hello Ali, we have type sets for New Orleans, and Carson City, why not one for Denver and Philly. Now these sets span a large range of dates so they could be split up by 19th, 20th, and 21st century with and without gold for the Philly mint to make them more manageable. As the Denver mint did not start operations until the 20th century only a 20th and 21st century split would be needed Some certs for a 19th century Philly set: 2590135-002 5903618-006 1748935-001 2209831-004 2194187-004 2032022-001 2112503-001 For a 20th century Philly set: 201125-002 2209831-003 1933768-004 3248416-004 294952-001 3425529-002 3418739-003 4237485-031 173143-003

You had been doing better at not posting misinformation recently, perhaps only because you have not been posting as much? But this reply (as well as your acid theory on another thread) is a return to your old misinformation form, the op's coin is not and bears absolutely no resemblance to the spitting eagle FS-901 variety that was caused by a die clash. If you don't know you would be better off not replying than to stick your foot into your mouth like this.

Looks like paint to me. If it had been subjected to an acid and the clad layer removed, especially to the point that the thickness reduced, the design would be much less clearly defined, and the surfaces would have a pebbly texture. I see none of that in the photos. @Glynn K. please post a photo of the edge, that will confirm or refute the acid theory being suggested.

I can see both eyes, the right eye (viewers right) is not as well formed but is there. Perhaps a weak strike or a some grease that interfered with getting a full strike, either way nothing of importance or interest imo. If you find it interesting you can always just stick it into a flip and save it, coin collecting is about collecting coins that interest us even if they may not have any interest to others.

Your best option for proper storage is to leave the mint and proof sets alone, store them in a cool dry place and use several desiccant packets. The binders that eagle posted are a good option for mint coins that already come in the plastic capsules.

Circulated coin, grades AU55 or thereabouts. Worth 3 cents, which is the value of the copper.

While non collectors, or those just starting out, find these minor issues interesting, most coin collectors pay them no mind as these types of things are quite common.

I think his leaving just creates a divergent point that is convenient for discussion. I have never really like TV's as I have not seen that many coins which look like the corresponding TV unless you can duplicate the lighting. I agree with you that TV's have always been too much glamor and less reality. Personally, I thought that the TV product started to look "off" several years ago, like the old saying too many cooks in the kitchen. When it was just Phil and a few others working together in the photo department they did turn out some very nice glamor shots. But once the staff grew it was clear that the work load was not allowing enough time for the work to be done to the same level. But at the same time, some of the recent shots shown in the thread ATS look really bad, honestly, I have never seen such terrible photos from the PCGS photo department as those I saw posted on that thread. I'm sure that the process is/was setup to be very production line like, almost has to be given the volume of work.

Really nothing wrong with that philosophy. @Sandon you are correct that Photograde is largely useless for my needs, but that doesn't mean that it cannot be useful for others, especially for collectors of circulated coinage.

Welcome to the forum, in the future it is best to start your own thread rather than hijacking another existing thread, far less confusing that way. As to your question, yes Photograde is still a very good and relevant grading resource.

I will echo the thoughts of the previous posts, you have a wonderful keepsake that hopefully evokes nice memories of your father. None of the coins are worth more than a few dollars each, the real value is in the personal connection and memories. Rather than spending a ton of money on low value coins, share the coins as they are with family and friends. Hopefully you have or may have a family member that you can pass them on to in the future so that these can become a family heirloom.

I really do not know, at FUN CAC had at their table a display of the D. L. Hanson Barber Half Dollar set in nice new CAC holders. Now I wasn't at FUN so I don't know if this was his top/best set or a duplicates set of Barbers. But getting high profile customers and sets like his, TDN, and perhaps a few of the notable Legend customers to move their coins into CACG holders could be huge. I've said it before, P and N have been grading coins for decades, it will be quite some time before CACG holders will be seen in the marketplace in volume like we see with P and N holders. And the volume seen depends on where one looks, I'm part of a FB CAC/CACG group and there are plenty of CACG holders being shown and sold in that group. Sales like those will not show up in any searches of traditional selling venues. I know you also participate on the forum ATS, there is a thread on the first page related to the recent decline in quality of TrueView photos since Phil took a new position at GC. And recently a member updated his year old thread to say that after almost exactly one year later he finally received a response from PCGS cs to his question. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but PCGS has the least experienced grading staff compared to NGC or CACG. If you put all this together it seems (to me anyway) that PCGS is not what they once were, and is sliding down the slope from what was once hailed as the premier service to a third tier level service. I personally haven't been impressed with PCGS for years, but the strong collector and dealer fan base has continued to prop them up and kept the veneer of being the best alive. With very vocal dealers like Laura pushing CACG (just as she did for PCGS) and PCGS doing their best to tank their service, it is not hard to see CACG becoming a significant, dominant force in the TPG landscape. And I also think it fair to note that Laura has a financial stake as an investor of CACG, so consider that when you look at her behavior in regards to CACG.

Not a fallacy at all, yes prior to CAC the best coins usually would sell for a premium, but not always. CAC takes the guess work out of it for lesser experienced collectors who might have missed the better coin or bought the problem coin. So because it is easier for collectors to identify the better quality coins I still contend that CAC approved coins are realizing higher premiums due to more bids than before CAC. This of course has been bad for dealers in several ways thus I understand why some dealers pushback to CAC.

You need to research how coins are made, there was no hand punching of mintmarks in 1993, thus there cannot be any RPM's. Simple worthless strike doubling.

Just another damaged coin, no errors at all.

Nice post, I enjoyed looking at your sets.

In addition to the tips given above use a stack of books or in a pinch a roll of toliet paper makes a great pad to place the phone on. Have the lens hang over the edge of the books or TP roll and shoot using no zoom or limited zoom. Here are two Lincolns that I have sitting on my desk that I just shot with my phone using a TP roll to steady the camera and just the ceiling fan lights. Not perfect as there is some glare as one coin is in a2X2 holder and the other in a plastic flip, but once cropped both are adequate for posting on the forum.

A wheatie is always a fun find in circulation. Far too much glare to be able to opine about the condition of the coin, try taking your photos with the coin laying on a black or white surface and then crop.