Sandon

There's a market for everything, but obviously a serious traditional collector wouldn't be interested in coins this worn and/or damaged. A young or beginning collector might pay something for the 1856-S quarter--I think you're right that the date is 1856--but only a small fraction of its value in undamaged Good. You could ask for, say, $20. Someone involved in the irrational "low ball set" fad might be interested in the 1914 Barber quarter, which appears to be undamaged. (As I understand it, qualifying "low ball" coins are supposed to be in Poor to Fair condition and identifiable as to date and mint, but undamaged.)

In my experience, a coin must have both sides meet the grading service's standards for "prooflike" for a grading service to place the term "prooflike" on the holder. NGC may give a coin that is prooflike on one side, most likely the obverse, a star ("*") grade if the coin has overall good eye appeal. I've seen star grades on NGC graded Morgan dollars with prooflike obverses and frosty reverses. Only NGC uses star grades, which are not recognized by the ANA grading standards. I suspect that PCGS and possibly other grading services may give coins with prooflike obverses an extra point or so for superior "eye appeal". The grading services all tend to place more emphasis on the obverse in grading.

1844 half dime, NGC graded MS 63, the repunched date variety, which may be less scarce than those with a perfect date: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

The presently uncertified 1906-D Liberty and 1909-D Indian half eagles (five dollar gold pieces) and the 1907 "Indian" Head eagle (ten dollar gold piece) shown here are part of a group of $75 face value in half eagles and eagles dated between 1881 and 1911 that my grandparents saved when gold coins were recalled from circulation in 1933. My grandmother told me that they were among the gold coins that customers spent at a corner grocery store that my grandparents and my grandfather's parents had operated in an East Coast city during the 1920s. Although a large portion of the U.S. gold coins that are available to collectors today are pieces that have returned from overseas storage, the pieces shown here are examples of those that were actually used in commerce in the United States. Though lightly worn, they have fewer bag marks than the typical coin returned from overseas. I have read contentions that U.S. gold coins were almost never used in day-to-day commerce in the twentieth century, except to some extent in the West. I know these coins to be evidence to the contrary. Your thoughts?

This topic has nothing to do with the edge of the coin, although I suppose that inverted edge lettering could be said to be analogous to rotated die errors. Take any U.S. coin, whether modern pocket change or a double eagle, and you will almost certainly observe that it is struck in a "coin turn". Rotated die errors--generally of little value--seem most common on Civil War era coins. I saw a circulated 1862 Indian cent that had the dies oriented 90 degrees off to the right, so that if you used my test, the reverse was sideways, with the shield on the right side. I've also seen rotations on two cent pieces of 1864 and 1865. The 1836 Gobrecht dollar comes in four different die alignments. At one time researchers believed that these alignments could be used to determine whether a coin was an 1836 "original" or a restrike, but it has now been determined that the rotation of the dies was related to problems with the feeder mechanism of the coinage press.

It would be helpful if you would post clear, cropped photos of each side of the coin in question. There are, unfortunately, counterfeits of American Silver Eagles. They are identified by characteristics other than their die alignment. I've never heard of counterfeit American Eagles with improperly oriented dies, but it is possible. U.S. coins are supposed to be struck in a 180-degree apart "coin turn" alignment where, if you hold the coin by its edges (or preferably by the edges of its holder) between your thumb and forefinger at the top and bottom (12 and 6 o'clock) with the obverse facing upright to your eyes and turn it horizontally to the other side, the reverse will be upside down. If this is what you mean, it is normal. (@EagleRJO called this a "vertical turn" in his post while I was writing this and proposed an opposite but equivalent test.) Occasionally, especially on older U.S. coins, the dies were misaligned in a "medal turn" for which the tests would produce opposite results or at various other degrees of rotation. Note that most world coins are struck in a "medal turn" alignment.

The error-ref.com site referred to in the topic I previously referenced has a good overview of most, if not all, types of mint errors. For missing clad layers, see the following pages: Missing Full Clad Before Strike (error-ref.com) Partial Clad Layer Before Strike (error-ref.com) Missing Clad Layer Partial After Strike (error-ref.com) Missing Both Clad Layers (error-ref.com) Struck Clad Layer: Split Off After Strike (error-ref.com)

Neither I nor, to my knowledge, any other participant on these forums, purports to know everything or always be right. Nor do I intend to insult anyone by giving him or her my honest opinion in answer to a question, as I have done here. (Would you really prefer that I didn't?) I don't consider myself an expert on ancient coins--I have collected primarily U.S. coins for 52 years--but I do know that a piece like this with a strangely rough surface and blobs of extra metal yet shined to an unnatural brilliance that has been placed in a piece of jewelry is likely to be one of the modern "replicas" that plague the market. (Although I've read that the prices of Athenian "owls" have come down in recent years due to the dispersal of a hoard said to number some 30,000 pieces, they are still valuable enough that it would be undesirable to shine a genuine one up so that the owl's eyes have a prooflike sheen.) While genuine ancient coins were struck by hand from a great number of different individually engraved die pairs, and no two are alike, the purported Athenian owl in the bezel has a much rougher surface and an overall appearance quite unlike that of the piece certified by NGC Ancients, better photos of which can be seen on NGC Certificate Verification (under the Resources tab on the NGC home page). The purported oral opinion of an unnamed dealer with unknown credentials does not render mine objectively "wrong". I admit that the written opinion of a dealer or collector with known expertise in ancient coins such as Harlan Berk would carry much more weight than mine. @JKK and any other ancient coin collectors on the forum--What is your opinion of this coin?

Could you post a copy of the certificate? If it was issued by the seller, it's probably worthless.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Although NGC doesn't provide free opinions, members of these forums can help. Your dime is just severely worn and damaged, probably from the action of the washing machine over time. I can see the remnant of a P or D mint mark above the date, meaning that it was minted after 1967 and is copper nickel clad, not silver. It has no value above its face value of ten cents, assuming you can get someone to accept it. You definitely wouldn't want to pay a $19 grading fee, plus a $10 processing fee and shipping costs to submit it to NGC.

Based on your photos, which would be better if they weren't on an angle and showed both sides of the coin, your 1918 Lincoln cent has simply been damaged by being scraped and dented by hard objects. It also appears to have areas that are coated with glue or other foreign matter. It is a "cull" that only a young collector might want for a few cents. You might want to review the following topic and some of the linked sites in it to learn how to distinguish mint errors from damaged coins:

The U.S. mint sold over a million--and in some years well over two million--uncirculated coin or "mint" sets every year from 1968 through 2003, except for 1982 and 1983, when no mint sets were offered. These sets provide an ample supply of most issues of circulating coinage from those years in uncirculated condition, without regard to however many rolls and bags of these coins were also saved by collectors and dealers. The numbers sold of these sets has dwindled substantially since then, with only a few hundred thousand sets sold annually in recent years. Additionally, the coins in mint sets from 2005 through 2010 have a "matte finish" and are collected by some as separate issues from circulating coinage. The mint now sells large quantities of uncirculated commemorative quarters, modern dollars, and Kennedy half dollars in rolls and bags, but the cents and particularly the nickels and dimes minted since 2005, with the exception of certain issues such as 2005 nickels and 2009 cents that were hoarded, may end up having a lower survival rate as uncirculated coins than their predecessors. Still, I doubt that any of these coins will be worth a premium in any circulated grade, at least during any of our lifetimes. If you want to save modern coins with any hope of seeing any appreciation during your lifetime, you should try to obtain the mentioned denominations made since 2005 in uncirculated condition. You can try to obtain such coins for the current or recent years as change from new rolls from cashiers or from bank rolls. You can also purchase mint sets notwithstanding the high premium now charged for them or try to purchase individual coins or rolls from dealers.

The "coin" in the pendant has the appearance of an Athenian tetradrachm or "owl", a popular coin from the fifth century B.C. However, this one is almost certainly a modern replica or fake made for use as jewelry. The genuine coins are composed of silver. This one appears to be made of a brass or other copper alloy. Based on the rough surface and brightness, it appears to have been cast rather than hammered and then highly polished.

Whichever sort of doubling this 1960-D cent has, I think we all agree it's not die doubling and not worth a premium!

While I agree with those who have previously replied based on your close-up photo that your 1940-D Lincoln cent only exhibits damage, in the future please post clear cropped photos of each side of the coin, not wide angle views in which the coin occupies only a small portion of the photo. We really can't evaluate the coin from such photos. See the following topic for additional suggestions about posting coins on these forums:

You might want to contact ebay and inquire about this policy, as these Russian imperial coins are widely held and traded in the United States, and you are not in Russia or exporting them from Russia.

@samclemen3991--Your inquiry is off-topic but may be of interest to other readers. If you go to the Home page of the chat board (the first page that comes up under "chat board) and select this forum (Newbie Coin Collecting Questions), you will see that as an active topic, it is presently listed near the top of the page. It will "sink" as it becomes less active, but you can continue to follow it by (1) clicking the green plus sign ("+") next to the topic title at the top of the page or (2) using the search bar at the top right of any chat board page to search for pertinent words.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Although based on your photos of the date, your 1936 Lincoln cent does appear to be the FS-101 doubled die obverse variety, the coin has obviously been improperly "cleaned" and has an unnatural color. It appears to have only Choice Very Fine details, not "AU 50" as stated on the holder. I would need cropped, clear photos of both sides of the coin to make a fuller assessment, as recommended by the lead post in following topic, which you should review: Based on what I can see, the coin likely has a retail value of no more than $100. It probably isn't worth the cost of submitting to a grading service, except perhaps by ANACS (anacs.com), which has lower rates for grading and attribution. I don't think that a coin of such a low value would be accepted as a lone consignment by Heritage or any other major numismatic auction house. It could be sold at a discount to a dealer at a coin shop or show or offered at a coin club auction or perhaps on ebay or a similar venue.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. This 1960-D cent only shows strike or machine doubling, and it is minor at that. NGC does not recognize coins with such doubling as errors or varieties, nor do serious collectors. See Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com). The coin has a number of heavy contact marks and assuming the red color is original likely grades no better than MS 64 RD, which shows a (probably too high) NGC Price Guide Value of $10. The cost of grading it would include a $23 grading fee, $10 per order processing fee, $28 return shipping fee, and, if you seek an error or variety attribution, an additional $18 fee, which NGC would keep whether or not it is so attributed, which it wouldn't be. You also would have to pay to ship the coin to NGC. Do the math.

None of the coins whose enlarged photos you show would be considered to be "in rather high MS". They would more likely be graded About Uncirculated (AU) and not be worth much over face value. The 1968-S is impaired by a circular scratch at the center of the reverse. If you're young, you might want to keep some of the oldest and the best of this group of nickels for possible appreciation in future decades, but I've saved coins like this for about 50 years and can't show much for my efforts.

For the NGC World Coin Price Guide listing of this coin, see Portugal Escudo KM 578 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). It is composed of copper-nickel. The coin has a minimal retail value listing in Fine condition of $7.50, but yours is worn down to About Good and probably of nominal value or unsalable in that condition. Most foreign coins trade at lower than catalog values in any event. There are collectors of coins issued by all countries, but except for rare issues, ones this worn don't attract much attention. They don't become more worn or deteriorate if they are properly handled.

I also agree that Liberty Seated coins of each denomination include a number of scarce and rare issues, but they aren't rare as type coins. Each series includes a number of issues that are common in all grades short of Choice to Gem Uncirculated, the latter being high priced due to their demand from higher level type collectors. You can generally go by their reported mintages. For the Seated quarters, the common dates include all of the Philadelphia coins dated from 1853 (Arrows & Rays) through 1862 (with the 1855, 59, 60, and 62 being a bit harder to find) and the 1875-77 Philadelphia. The 1876-77 CC and S mints are also relatively common, as are the 1891 and 91-S. You should be able to find at least several of these dates, although often in low grade or impaired condition, at any local coin show or coin shop or online. A number of other issues, including some from before 1853, can't really be called "rare" either. The term "rare coin" is relative. To a non-collector or huckster it might mean any coin you can't expect to find in circulation. To another it might mean key dates of popular series like the 1909-S V.D.B. Lincoln cent or the 1893-S Morgan dollar, even though many thousands of each of these issues are known to exist. To a very wealthy collector it might mean an 1885 Trade dollar or 1913 Liberty nickel (5 of each known to exist) that seldom becomes available for any price. To the condition fanatic it could mean any coin, even a 2022 Lincoln cent, if it has received a high enough grade from a grading service. For the purposes of this topic, I would define the term rare as a coin that is at least somewhat difficult to find in any collectable grade (but a few of which do tend to turn up at major coin shows and auctions) and a strain on the average collector's budget when found. By this definition, no entire series of Liberty Seated coins can be called "rare".

Please, at a minimum, post clear, cropped photos of each entire side of the coin and more focused photos of the area where you claim to see "doubling", as I can't see any doubling in your photo. (Did you read the topic?) You might also want to check your coin against the photos of the two doubled die varieties recognized in NGC VarietyPlus, which you can find under the "Resources" tab on the home page The legal weight of a newly minted 1943 steel cent was between 2.689 and 2.754 grams, with a tolerance of 0.13 grams. The slightly low weight of 2.5 grams may be attributable to the coin being worn or rusted or your scale being inaccurate or rounding to the nearest 0.1 or 0.5 gram. To weigh coins, which is usually unnecessary, a digital scale should give weights out to the nearest 0.01 gram. In any case, this slight deviation for a base metal, mass produced coin is likely irrelevant. Unless it is a recognized doubled die variety, the coin is probably worth no more than 50 cents retail.

Here are the photos and descriptions of the diagnostics of the "Accented Hair" variety from NGC VarietyPlus: "There is a wishbone-shaped group of extra hairs that are incused on the coin above Kennedy's ear. Also, the bottom left serif of letter I in LIBERTY is incomplete, letter G in the designer's initials is lacking a serif, and the rays are broken where they pass through the stars." All 1964 Kennedy half dollars have some deeply engraved hair strands as shown in your photos, which leads to the frequent confusion about this variety. The "Accented Hair" variety has several additional such strands, as well as the other diagnostics.

What is your question? I see nothing unusual about this portion of the obverse of a 1943 zinc coated steel cent, of which over 684 million were minted. Please review and follow the recommendations in the following topic so that we may better assist you: