Sandon

The "ANA" (American Numismatic Association) hasn't graded coins since the early 1990s, when the association sold ANACS (originally the American Numismatic Association Certification Service) to private owners. ANACS has been privately owned since that time and is not affiliated with the ANA. The "ANACS" name is no longer an acronym. The only "ANA graded coins" would be unencapsulated coins accompanied by ANACS photo certificates from the 1970s and 80s and coins in the minority of small size ANACS holders that have the words "AMERICAN NUMISMATIC ASSOCIATION" on the hologram on the back of the holder. The ANA has designated NGC as its official grading service for some years now in return for NGC providing certain benefits to ANA members and, I believe, other consideration.

A weakly struck coin is weakest on the highest points. This piece seems well-struck everywhere--assuming that it was struck and not cast--but the detail just doesn't appear to match that of a genuine Trade dollar.

I think that this piece is likely counterfeit. As you noted, the surfaces have a suspiciously grainy finish with weak or "mushy" details. The stars and many other design features appear to be too small. The numerals in the date look too narrow. (The mint marks on this issue come in small, medium, and large sizes per the Bowers Silver Dollars and Trade Dollars of the United States encyclopedia (1993), so the smaller mint mark than on the PCGS authenticated piece isn't determinative.)

1804 crosslet 4, no stems half cent, PCGS graded VF 35:

1795 Flowing Hair dollar, 3 leaves, BB-27, B-5, NGC graded XF details due to some old tooling that strengthened a few hair strands. This is my favorite coin! Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Although there are dealers who may make unfairly low offers for coins, this probably hasn't happened to you, as the coins you are showing aren't very valuable. Your 1971-S 40% silver clad proof Eisenhower dollar in its original packaging, of which the mint sold over 4.2 million to collectors, sells for about $10-$12 and contains about $7.61 in silver at the current silver price, which changes daily. A fair current offer from a dealer would be about $7. Your 1964 (or 1964-D) Kennedy half dollar in About Uncirculated condition or so and your two Fine or so condition common date Walking Liberty half dollars would only be worth no more than their current silver value of $8.70 or so each to a dealer, probably no more than $8 or so to most dealers. (The 1941 dated piece might be worth a premium of less than a dollar if it is a 1941-S, but I can't tell without seeing the reverse, where any mint mark would be located on any of these half dollars.) In the future, please post clear, cropped photos of each side of any coins about which you have questions. You can check the daily silver value of these coins at U.S. Silver Coin Melt Values | Silver Dollar Melt Value | NGC (ngccoin.com). If you want to learn about U.S. coins and how to grade and otherwise value them, the following topic describes some essential print and online resources that would help you:

The 1824 Capped Bust half dollar features prominent strike doubling that created the appearance of a double profile of Liberty, as frequently seen on both large cents and half dollars of this era.

The better photos than on your previous post indicate that this 1957-D Lincoln cent has a scrape on the "7" of the date that dislodged and shifted some of the metal of that numeral. The reverse also shows damage. It is possible that the depression beneath and through the last letters of "AMERICA" originated with a planchet lamination (poorly mixed metal that flaked off the planchet after it was struck). This could be classified as a mint error, but it would not be a significant or valuable one. Contrary to what you may have seen on non-numismatic sites such as YouTube, coins exhibiting significant mint errors rarely turn up in circulation. I've been collecting U.S. coins and looking through change for the past 52 years, and the only legitimate error coins I've found are a couple of "broadstruck" quarters and a blank cent planchet, each worth only a few dollars each. In order to learn about error coins and what they look like, you may want to review the following introductory articles about mint errors on the NGC website: Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 1 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 2 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 3 | NGC (ngccoin.com) For a comprehensive overview of mint errors, see error-ref.com. If you are a new collector, you may also benefit from the following topics on this forum:

This appears to be a corrosion spot, as commonly appears on copper alloy and copper plated zinc coins. I've been collecting coins for 52 years but have never heard of a "digital coin". What do you mean by this? Could you direct me to any books, articles or websites about "digital coins"? (I assume you don't mean physical cryptocurrency, which looks nothing like this and isn't attached to government-issued traditional coins.)

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The Coin Marketplace forum is reserved for topics seeking to buy or sell coins. Please repost your topic on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum with clear, cropped photos of each side of the coin, and describe the characteristics you believe constitute a mint error. If you're referring to the line through the "7" in the date, it is likely a "die chip", which is extremely common and not worth a premium. A circulated 1957-D Lincoln cent like this one is a "common wheat cent" that is only worth a few cents to collectors.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your 1992-D Lincoln cent does not exhibit a mint error. The small raised area on the reverse of the coin between "A" and "T" is either an area of raised corrosion or a plating bubble. All cents made since 1983 (and some dated 1982) are composed of copper plated zinc, which is highly subject to corrosion when it comes in contact with many substances in the environment. Note the green compound that has also formed on the upper reverse. Additionally, such cents of this composition made between 1982 and the mid-1990s were prone to have small bubbles that formed between the zinc core and the copper plating. These bubbles are extremely common and are regarded as examples of poor quality control, not as mint errors. Your coin also appears to exhibit a raised area resulting from a die chip in Lincoln's hair, but this is also considered to indicate poor quality control and is not regarded as a mint error or worth any premium to knowledgeable collectors. Contrary to what you may have seen on non-numismatic sites such as YouTube, coins exhibiting significant mint errors rarely turn up in circulation. I've been collecting and looking through change for the past 52 years, and the only legitimate error coins I've found are a couple of "broadstruck" quarters and a blank cent planchet, each worth only a few dollars each. Before looking at the error-ref.com site referred to by @Greenstang, you may want to review the following introductory articles about mint errors on the NGC website: Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 1 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 2 | NGC (ngccoin.com) Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 3 | NGC (ngccoin.com) If you are new to collecting U.S. coins generally, you would also benefit from the following topics on this forum:

Does the coin stick to a magnet? If it doesn't, it isn't magnetic.

The last photos are of an 1836 lettered edge half dollar, the last made under the older "open collar" method. These photos are of an 1836 reeded edge half dollar, the first issue under the close collar method and with a steam powered press: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

It still appears to be a die chip, which results from a piece of metal missing from the die other than from an advanced die break that formed a similar but usually larger lump called a "cud". When a coin is struck metal fills the depression left by the chip, causing a lump. A coin can have one die chip or any number of them, and they come in a variety of shapes and sizes. (Did you think that the lump is the piece of die steel that came off the die?) A coin struck from a clashed die would tend to show the outline of the shallowest features of the reverse die, not just those as deep as this lump. U.S. coins from the late 1940s to about the mid-1960s seem to have been made from dies that frequently chipped. The so-called "BIE" Lincoln cents from the 1950s and the clogged numerals on 1960 small date cents that led to the adoption of the larger date style are examples. Some months back I posted the following topic about the "BIE" and related cents:

Based on your photo, the anomaly looks like a lump, which would be a die chip, not a reverse image of a corresponding portion of the reverse die, which would indicate a clash mark. Perhaps a close-up image of the affected area would show something else. It's certainly unusual to receive a silver coin in change in recent years.

1941 "Mercury" dime, PCGS graded PR 65: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

That's why it is difficult to respond to your request. You need to have basic knowledge of U.S. coins to formulate questions that we can answer directly and concisely. In my response to your topic about a 1904-O Morgan dollar I provided a link to a topic of mine entitled "Resources for New Collectors," which names and explains how to obtain some essential print and online resources that you need to obtain such basic knowledge. At a bare minimum, you need to familiarize yourself with a standard current (2024 edition) or recent "Redbook", a grading guide, and, if you intend to buy coins, a current price guide. I'll try to give you an overview of early half dollars in the context of early (pre-1837 or so) coins generally. Before 1837 most U.S. coinage dies were individually made up from individual punches for the devices, letters, stars, numbers, etc., so each die pair produced a distinct variety with these elements in slightly different positions. Beginning in 1837 (1836 for some coins) dies for U.S. coins have generally been produced from "hubs" or master dies that include all design elements except for the dates and any mint marks, so after that there are fewer dies that were distinctly different enough for every die and die pair to be catalogued. Die varieties of later series, including the popular Morgan and Peace dollar VAMS, mainly result from noticeably different date or mint mark positions, errors in the die making process, or damaged or worn dies. (Since about 1908 the dates and since about 1991 mint marks are also included in hubs.) Early U.S. coins are also sometimes collected by die "states" that developed as the dies wore and are indicated by die cracks or breaks, clash marks, and additional changes that resulted from the dies being repolished or reworked. The die varieties for the various types and denominations of early U.S. coins have been catalogued by various authors, with the catalog numbers based on their names, "O" numbers after Al C. Overton in the case of early half dollars from 1794 to 1836, consisting of the Flowing Hair (1794-95), Draped Bust small eagle reverse (1796-97 and rare), Draped Bust heraldic eagle reverse (1801-07) and Capped Bust lettered edge (1807-36). As I recall, there are over 500 known Overton die varieties of these series, ranging from quite common to very rare. Standard guides such as the "Redbook" list only the most distinctive and commonly collected varieties for each year, such as overdates like the 1817 7 over 3 included among your coins, and varieties featuring distinctly different numeral or letter sizes. The mint struck half dollars of the mentioned series on hand operated screw presses, so the striking quality varies widely. These half dollars were also struck in an "open collar" that didn't tightly hold the planchet while the coin was struck, so the edge dentils on some coins vary in width around the circumference of the coin, as on your 1810. The open collar enabled the mint to place the edge lettering "FIFTY CENTS OR HALF A DOLLAR" on the planchet before the coin was struck. Subsequent types, struck in tightly fitting "close collars" on steam powered presses were of more uniform diameter and edge width and tend to be better struck but had reeded edges that could be created by a close collar with a grooved edge, as the close collar would crush any previously added edge lettering. You can see the results of these technological changes by comparing the photos of these two half dollars from my collection, an 1834 large date and letters graded AU 58 by PCGS but somewhat unevenly struck, with a scarce 1836 reeded edge graded AU 53 by NGC, one of a few thousand struck in a close collar on the mint's new steam powered press: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

1938-D Walking Liberty half dollar, PCGS graded XF 40:

I assume that you have no questions about these Capped Bust half dollars. Regarding your observations about the 1810, the spots are likely indicative of a coin that was "dipped" in an anti-tarnish solution and then not properly rinsed. Such spotting is not a natural toning pattern. I collect these coins by "Redbook" variety and have at least one of each date. Most are uncertified and stored in an album. You can see photos and descriptions of the NGC and PCGS certified pieces, which include the "key" 1815 and 1836 reeded edge and some higher-grade pieces, can be seen on the NGC Registry at Set Details | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com).

I can now see the "E" to which you are referring. It is part of the same clash mark from "E PLURIBUS UNUM", the rest of which appears beneath the bust. There are no clash marks on the bust itself because the image of the bust was impressed into the die and thereby protected from the clash. Post-mint damage is any form of damage, such as but not limited to scratches, nicks, and dents, that occurs to a coin after it is struck. Bag marks and abrasions that occur from coin-to-coin contact are regarded as normal unless severe and lower the coin's mint state grade but are regarded differently from intentional or accidental damage that occurs after the coin goes into circulation. Specialists collect these early half dollars both by die varieties as listed in the Overton reference with "O" numbers and by die states of those varieties. The later states are designated by letters beginning with "a" added to the Overton number and often feature clash marks. NGC VarietyPlus, which you can find under the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page shows photos of the various Overton varieties for each date and some of the die states. You may find more detailed attribution and rarity information at http://maibockaddict.com/. There are ten die varieties for 1813 (O-101 through O-110) and several collected die states. Only the 1813 with "50 C. over UNI" is separately listed in the standard "Redbook". You can attempt to determine the die variety and die state of your coin. The 1817 with 7 over 4 (1817 variety O-102) is an extreme rarity with only eight or so pieces known. It is quite unlikely that you would find one. However, I recall that only four were known when I started collecting some 52 years ago, so one never knows.

Your 1813 Capped Bust half dollar was struck from strongly clashed dies, which are created when the dies are pressed together without a planchet (coin blank) between them. The pressure created an impression of part of the scroll bearing the words "E PLURIBUS UNUM" and other obverse details in the field of the obverse die, which in turn pressed a backwards impression of these details into subsequently struck coins. Such "clash marks" are a common occurrence on both older coins like this one and modern coins as well. I'm not sure what you're referring to in front of Liberty's chest but do notice some light scratches or "graffiti", which are post-mint damage.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. This coin appears to have some light strike doubling (a.k.a. machine doubling or mechanical doubling), which results from dies being loose in the press. You can also see this slight, "shelf-like" doubling on the obverse stars. This is considered to be a quality control issue rather than a mint error and adds no value to the coin. It is distressing to see it on a collector's issue that was supposed to be carefully produced. Generally, significant mint errors can be seen with the naked eye or low magnification. Anomalies that require the level of magnification you are using in your photos are seldom if at all considered significant.

Sending coins to grading services is the last thing that a new or casual collector should be thinking about! Instead, you should learn how approximately to grade and otherwise evaluate coins yourself. This is a process that will take you some years to master and will involve the study of grading guides and other numismatic books and resources, the examination of many professionally graded coins, and conversations with experienced collectors and dealers, which you can do at such venues as coin shows and coin club meetings. A coin should be worth at least several hundred dollars in order for it to be financially worthwhile to send to a third-party grading service such as NGC, and you will be unable to make that determination without going through this process. A 1904-O Morgan dollar is an abundantly common issue of which it is believed several million uncirculated pieces were found in a Treasury vault that was unsealed in 1962. NGC and PCGS have together numerically graded over 302,000 pieces, the most frequently awarded grade at either service being MS 64, which currently has a bloated retail (dealer selling) list value of $125-$150. Coins grading MS 62 list $75-$85. A coin returned with a circulated--even AU--grade or "details" graded due to "cleaning" or other impairments would be worth no more than $45 at retail, and a dealer would likely pay no more than its silver value. In any of these cases, the least expensive option for grading at NGC ("Economy" for coins valued under $300 each) would involve a $23 per coin grading fee, a $10 per order processing fee, a $28 per order up to ten coin return shipping fee, and your cost of shipping your coins to NGC. (You could also submit the coins through an authorized dealer, who might get a discount but would likely charge you for the service.) It really isn't worthwhile at these prices to submit the coin unless you have a good reason to believe that it will be graded at least MS 65, with a retail list value around $225. I am unable to evaluate your coin thoroughly, especially its obverse due to the darkness of the photo, but from what I can see it appears to have uncirculated details but highly doubt that it would grade MS 64 or better. The grade would be based upon a number of characteristics, including the number, size, and location of bag marks and other abrasions, the quality of the strike (which seems somewhat weak), the luster, and its overall "eye appeal". There appears to be a large area of discoloration or abrasions at the lower portion of Liberty's face, which would negatively affect the grade. I strongly urge you to learn more before submitting your coins to grading services. The resources shown in the following forum topics should be of assistance to you:

1787 Fugio Copper, "States United" with four cinquefoils, catalogued by the seller as Newman die variety 17-S, PCGS graded XF details, environmental damage. I consider it a decent looking example despite some light corrosion. Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

1849 Liberty Seated half dollar, PCGS graded XF 40. An original looking and affordable coin: