Alex in PA.

Louisiana's "Ordnance of Secession" was adopted January 29, 1861. The State of Louisiana claimed the New Orleans Mint and continued operating it. The mint director felt that since the coins were not made by the United States, they were not legal tender. Treasury Secretary John A. Dix disagreed.
 

I agree with @GBrad  There is something off about your S.  I do not know what NGC meant by altered.  Possible changed or enhanced in some way.  Maybe try ATS and get a second opinion??

“…Proclamation by the President or by Act of Congress…that the coins of the Branch Mint at New Orleans of the year 1861 are not of the coinage of the United States, and are therefore not a legal tender in the payment of debt. Said coins are designated by the letter O on the reverse of each piece.”


 
[Excerpt from letter February 18, 1861 by Director of the Mint to Secretary of the Treasury. RG104 E-216 vol 21. Suggestion rejected as cause for confusion.]

Major Saints Collection Auction @ HA:  I see that while I was out of commission there was a pretty prestigious Saint-Gaudens DE collection auctioned off a week ago (The Warren Collection).  Mostly very high-end.  I'm not as familiar with the pricing for alot of these super-expensive coins so I might have to research if they moved up in price alot.  Certainly, these coins would NOT be impacted by the Covid-19 newcomer bidding, they're not chasing 5-figure and 6-figure gold coins.
If you are familiar with these coins or bid, let us know what you think about the final prices. 
Select coins, after the first 10 or so chronologically, I skipped around to just focus on the 6-figure or pricey ones:
A 1907 MS67 PCGS......$276,000 (incl. BP). 1908 NM WF MS68.......$20,400 1908-D MS66.................$28,800 1908 Motto MS66...........$50,400 1908-D Motto MS66.......$21,000 1908-S MS66 CAC ......$156,000 1909/08 MS66 CAC......$336,000 (FS-301 on label, anybody know what that means ?  Probably in RWB's book). 1909 MS66 CAC...........$312,000 1909-D MS66+..............$264,000 1909-S MS66.................$26,400 1911-D MS67.................$54,000 1913 MS65 CAC............$102,000 1920 MS65.....................$180,000 1920-S MS65.................$600,000 1921 MS63.....................$312,000 1924-D MS65.................$144,000 1925 MS67 CAC............$132,000 1925-D MS66.................$336,000 1927-S MS64..................$114,000 1929 MS65.......................$90,000 1930-S MS65 CAC.........$288,000 1931 MS65 CAC.............$312,000 1931-D MS65..................$228,000 1932 MS66......................$288,000

In April, a 1492 Sovereign, King Henry VII, went to auction in Japan. NGC sent out a nice information notice about this coin.  If I recall correctly, there are only two of these in private hands. The sovereign (below) is the earliest sovereign that a private collector can own. It is a type II. The first sovereign minted, type I, was hammered in 1489 and only a single example is known. This sovereign was acquired by the British museum in 1915, I believe, and has been in their collection ever since.
What caught my eye about the 1492 offering is that J.P. Morgan once owned it. What didn’t the guy own at one time or another?   There are five distinct types, or issues , that were struck during Henry VII reign. Each being quite different than the others.    There is no other coin in the world that has ever had the history, the influence, or the length of time it has been issued - than the sovereign. It is also the only coin that has been struck on five continents.    A type set that includes all of the different monarchs that issued sovereigns would be an amazing collection. 
  the two hammered sovereigns are a type II and a type III.   As a bonus quiz: on the Queen Victoria sovereign imaged below, what is the significance of the two dates 1838 and 2017? Answer will be provide, although I am sure some of you know this already, later.  

This is an excellent post.  Another of my 'Learning

I see nothing in those photos to indicate an overdate, seems that the seller is either not knowledgeable enough to know or is trying to pull a fast one.

It's not O/CC.

Back again I see.  Looks like your 'professional' photography hasn't improved.  If NGC graded show us the slab or is this another one of your con jobs?

This post on another message board is certain to confuse and mislead newer collectors. https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1075302/the-original-1916-quarter
The statement in that post is entirely false.
The obverse design pictured was MacNeil's final design and the one actually approved for use by Secretary of the Treasury in late August 1916.

The Mint director stuck with a modification of the original (May 1916), then Morgan revised it for the initial 1917 coins. MacNeil objected and was allowed to revise his design to the one known as "Type II." (The photo is one I took while authenticating the bronze cast in 2008.)
The reverse pictured on the false post dates from 1917 and was one of MacNeil's proposed modifications to the star arrangement. It has no connection whatsoever to the dolphin obverse, It was never used.
[See Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921 for facts.]

None of the members are "tied" to NGC or any other company. A message board like this one is composed of coin collectors with a wide range of experience, and a considerable depth of honesty that you will not find on esty and other garbage "experts" you've listened to.
Mr. Lange is the Research Director at NGC and offers occasional thoughts as appropriate to the situation - usually about a posted variety question.

A 1936 early commemorative I own:

NGC MS-63. Pretty nice for a 63.
This history presented here are the thoughts of Charles M. Prager of the Baltimore Coin Club in 1936:
    Whatever the reason for increased affection toward U. S. commemorative half dollars (and we read that new collectors are springing up like mushrooms), it can hardly be the artistic merit of the series. No; it must be that the new addicts, like us 'old-timers,' are motivated by the sheer, childish mania for accumulating shiny playthings. Admires of art we emphatically are not!
More to follow

The new photos are much better. Aim for at least this photo quality in future posts. They clearly show it is a damaged, corroded 1920 cent. Doesn't matter if it had rainbow-skittle stripes and polka dots; it is what it is.
You asked for opinions from experienced collectors and that is what they provided.

Why are u so rude I’m not jerking anyone chain an I know that y’all see all types of people but can tell you that I’m honest person an total disabled veteran trying to only have a hobby an not looking to deceive anyone for profit. I may be going at it wrong but got try because I do like the coin hobby an I’m sorry that you have made wrongful judgment of me

Guaranteed authentic,  If it is real, which it might be, AU 55 or 58.

Pure fantasy. 100% wishcraft. Fake news. Fantasy. Not true. Nuh uh. Four Pinocchios. 

No legitimate authentication service or coin seller would: a) authenticate either coin, and b) designate either "proof like."  Variety of your 1878 dollar is immaterial - the coin was ruined long ago. Woods Alex and the others are entirely correct.

Auction companies usually did the authentication and grading as printed in the catalogs - but, buyers knew which auctioneers were honest and which ones overgraded, so they "bought the coin not the grade."
Now everyone is so completely dependent on the 2 or 3 major "grading" companies, that coins just get stuffed in with loose descriptions. The smart buyers will cherry pick.

Brad I’m not smelling what you’re stepping in. There is no evidence of an O mint mark, just a 55 D I’m sorry to say. Welcome to the forum sir.
The New Orleans Mint (French: Monnaie de La Nouvelle-Orléans) operated in New Orleans, Louisiana, as a branch mint of the United States Mint from 1838 to 1861 and from 1879 to 1909. 

These pics still aren’t worthwhile, but I do believe a decent picture will show this coin has been wizzed/polished. 

Welcome to the forum, it depends on what you are slabbing and why.   If you are doing so for the sole purpose of reselling on auction sites then for some coin types using PCGS may result in higher hammer prices.   If you are doing so just for your own personal use then it really does not matter and I would suggest that you review some of the coins from both services that are similar to what you plan to submit and see if one service grades a bit more like you would.
For future reference this section of the forum is used for selling or buying coins, you will get more looks and interaction if you post general questions in the newbie or US coin sections of this forum.
 

The fun/hard part for me is looking for unknown varieties.

CVS cheap readers. It doesn’t change the fact that you are obsessed with things that have no market value. 

Hint: two are (probably - lighting can still play tricks) and two I can tell instantly are not. Whatever dealer said all 4 are proofs is either a crook or an i-d-I-o-t. By the way, there isn’t even one coin here that is worth $30, proof or otherwise.