Sandon

@EagleRJO--In the early years of grading services, coins that had any impairment, including being "cleaned", were not encapsulated but were returned in flips. The somewhat morbid terminology of "slabs" and "body bags" began at that time, with collectors and (especially) dealers complaining that their coins had been "body bagged" for some trivial reason. Details grading and encapsulation for impaired but genuine and unaltered coins didn't start until some years later, initially with the small ANACS holders. For a while PCGS would encapsulate impaired coins with no grade at all in a holder identifying the coin by denomination, date, mint and variety with no grade and the description "Genuine". Nowadays both NGC and PCGS will encapsulate and details grade nearly all genuine coins, except for coins that whose dates, mintmarks or other vital features have been altered to defraud. NGC will not encapsulate coins with "altered surfaces" and, as I recall, neither NGC nor PCGS will encapsulate a coin with a "peeling lamination" that might come off. @VKurtB--Coins returned in "Details hard slabs" have, by definition, been encapsulated!

Coins struck since 1982 are almost exclusively collected in unworn mint state or proof grades, which are 9.0 to 10.0 on the NGCX scale. If the NGCX scale is intended only for use on such coins, why does the scale include circulated grades from 1 to 8.5?

Yes. As in your photo the "bag" is actually a flip that includes a grading service tag stating why the coin couldn't be encapsulated.

Start a new topic just as you have done here, except instead of in the "NGC Registry" forum, start the topic in the forum entitled "Ask NGC/NCS" for questions about NGC submissions or service or at the forum entitled "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" for your questions about coins.

Mint and other medals by Paquet also turn up on occasion at major numismatic dealers and auction houses.

I assume that you mean U.S coins and patterns that were designed or engraved by Anthony Paquet from the mid-nineteenth century. The only coin that you could easily and affordably find would be an 1859 half dime (Philadelphia mint only). The obverses of all 1859 Philadelphia half dimes feature Paquet's engraving of the Seated Liberty instead of the usual 1840-59 with drapery engraving by Hughes based on Gobrecht's original concept. I would simply find a well-detailed 1859 (not 59-O) half dime in a reputable dealer's inventory. These list in Coin World at $85 XF, $150 AU, $375 MS 63 Ch. BU, and $800 MS 65 "Gem" BU. The only other collectible Paquet coin is the 1861-S double eagle ($20 gold) with Paquet's tall letters reverse, which was retired as a failure after 19,250 coins were struck and replaced with the regular reverse, with the NGC Coin Explorer stating that only 100 or so pieces with the Paquet reverse survive. Retail list prices for VF or better examples start at $45,000. They turn up occasionally at major coin auctions such as those by Heritage (ha.com), Stacks Bowers (stacksbowers.com), Great Collections (greatcollections.com), and Goldberg (goldbergcoins.com). Check their auction listings and archives. It's conceivable that a major coin dealer, such as a PNG member (pngdealers.com), could locate one. Only two exist of the Philadelphia version of double eagles with this reverse, which are valued at approximately $2 million apiece. Pattern pieces designed by Paquet, such as 1859 and 1860 half dime patterns with his obverse and different reverses (costing several thousand dollars), and, as I recall, some with original designs, may also be found at major coin auctions and in the inventories of major dealers. One pattern specialist dealer you could try is Julian Leidman, juliancoin.com, 301-585-8467. I hope this helps.

Draped Bust quarters can be difficult to grade due to striking weakness. This one appears to have been fairly well struck and correctly graded in the VF range per the current ANA grading guide (7th edition). It could grade a little higher in that range today, though the motto (E PLURIBUS UNUM) is a little weak. PCI, now defunct, was a legitimate though lesser-known grading service in its green (numerical grade) and red (details grade) label days. A dealer told me that he had purchased an 1879-CC Morgan dollar graded MS 61 in a green border PCI holder and had cracked it out and submitted it to PCGS. It came back graded MS 63! The pieces in the gold border holders date from after PCI had been acquired by a dealer who largely and unethically used PCI's name and equipment to (over)grade his own inventory. As I recall, he was ultimately convicted of fraud.

If you are a new collector, please refer to the following topic describing some important print and online resources with which you should become familiar before proceeding to spend any substantial amount of money on coins with anyone: Anyone can post videos on YouTube! There are some posted by the American Numismatic Association, NGC, PCGS, and major auction houses and dealers (see below) that may be helpful, but there are misinformed and dishonest persons who also do so. Are there any coin shows held in your area? You should go to these shows and look carefully at as many of the coins that interest you as possible and talk to the dealers about them. Your purchases should be modest until you have acquired knowledge and developed your own taste. You may also consider joining a local coin club, where you may be able to learn from other members who are more experienced collectors. If you insist on buying expensive coins before you have become thoroughly familiar with them, only buy such coins that have been certified by the major grading services, especially NGC and PCGS. ANACS and ICG certified coins may also be acceptable. Dealers who are members of the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG) are well-established, reputable dealers with substantial net worth who are required to abide by a code of ethics. Go to the PNG's website (pngdealers.org) for further information and a member dealer directory. The major numismatic auction houses, including Heritage (ha.com), Stacks Bowers (stacksbowers.com), Goldberg Coins & Collectibles (goldbergcoins.com), and Great Collections (greatcollections.com), have regular auctions of mostly more expensive certified coins and also maintain archives of their sale catalogs and other features of educational value. There are other reputable dealers, but I would need to know in what part of the country you live before I might be able to make any recommendations.

You are showing a 2000 American Eagle silver bullion coin that was painted by a private company that has nothing to do with the U.S. mint! (The "certificate" so indicates.) These were privately mass marketed as "collectibles" and aren't "rare". Nor are they desirable to serious coin collectors, who want coins with their original surfaces. A few years ago, the U.S. mint "got into the act" and has issued a few commemoratives with "colorized" options that are painted by a private contractor for people who want such things, but no such item was officially issued in 2000. I wouldn't do any further business with this dealer! We have a saying, "Buy the book before the coin." Do you have a current "Redbook"? If it's not in that book, it's not mint issued! I can direct you to resources that can help you upon request. The medallion you just posted isn't a U.S. coin, nor does it appear to be a U.S. mint medal. What did the dealer claim it was?

It is a continuing point of controversy whether any particular coin features "original" or "artificial" toning. However, I have never seen a reputable grading service numerically grade a silver coin with toning that looked like this.

The current 1 to 70 numerical scale--it's not really Sheldon's--was approved by the ANA Board of Governors in 1986 and is the basis for the ANA grading guide. The ANA does not claim it as its own intellectual property, and anyone can use it. So far as I know it is supposed to be the basis for the grades assigned by all reputable grading services, although they obviously deviate from its standards on a regular basis. (I don't think that the ANA has ever approved the "plus" grades used for some years now by both NGC and PCGS or the "star" grades used by NGC.) I assume that NGC will claim the "NGCX" scale as proprietary and will not permit competing grading services or others to use it. It appears that it is a marketing ploy by NGC to lure mass marketers to submit bulk orders of modern coins for sale to collectors of other items that are evaluated on a 1 to 10 scale. As I initially wrote, it is likely to create more confusion about coin grading than already exists.

The same thing happened to me earlier this year with a 1913 variety one Buffalo nickel (as @EagleRJO mentioned while I was writing this). I knew that a coin that NCS has "conserved" may receive a "details" grade but decided to take the risk. (I already realized there was a risk of this particular coin being returned "details" graded.) I'm not likely to do it again. I've collected and studied coins and their grading standards for over 50 years and, except for sending a few coins to ANACS decades ago, only began submitting some of my (mostly higher value) pieces for grading this year. You really have to be familiar with grading and the habits of the grading service you've chosen regarding what constitutes an impairment if you want to be successful. I can see hairlines from a "cleaning" on the coin in your photo, which I doubt were put there by NCS. The coin probably also had contamination from a PVC flip, which can just look like a slight haze or small spot. In my case I've had more coins that came back with higher grades than I anticipated than lower ones, such as the 1909-S Indian cent I just submitted purchased as a "Fine" in 1989 and which I thought would grade VF 25 or so by today's standards, but which came back from NGC graded XF 40! Even major dealers who are experienced in grading submissions get some pieces back "details" graded, as Jeff Garrett (former ANA president and prominent dealer) discusses in his recent article for NGC, which you can find at Jeff Garrett: The Art of Rare Coin Submissions | NGC (ngccoin.com) (right click for menu to open). If you've only been a collector for a fairly brief time, you may wish to refrain from submitting uncertified coins until you've become more experienced and knowledgeable about the nuances involved.

Please see the following topic that I posted for some books and online resources that are essential for new collectors: For some basic knowledge about mint errors and die varieties, go to the NGC home page (ngccoin.com) and enter "mint errors" in the search bar for some articles on the NGC website. For a more comprehensive listing go to error-ref.com.

Here's an example of what we're talking about, although it doesn't have to be this far off center (NGC photos):

That's why NGC is doing this. They apparently think that this will induce card and comic book collectors to become collectors of modern coins.

Your 1952-S cent appears to have a die chip of the type frequently seen on U.S. coins of the 1950s and early 60s. They're interesting but usually of little value to collectors. The blurry "LI" is from either damage or a filled die, which also isn't valued by collectors. If you're interested in learning more about coins, we can guide you to the appropriate print and online resources.

I see nothing about your coin from the photo you provided, which is somewhat too bright, that would qualify it as a collectible mint error or die variety. The bases of the "A" and "M" on each of the several types of reverses used on Washington quarters from 1932-1998 all touch or nearly touch. Yours appears to be a copper nickel clad coin of 1965-98, on which I believe they always touch. There does appear to be a small die chip at the bottom of the first "A" in "AMERICA". Die chips are generally regarded by collectors as examples of poor quality control at the mint (worn dies) rather than as mint errors and command little or no premium from collectors. From what sources did you obtain your information that your coins qualified as desirable mint errors? We can guide you to appropriate print and online sources, such as the error-ref.com site that @Coinbuf recommended. You may also wish to go the NGC home page (ngccoin.com) and type "mint errors" in the search bar, which will return a series of articles on mint errors and die varieties. We can more readily assist someone who has some knowledge of the subject matter.

While the originally posted 1866-S is scarce, especially in higher grades, here's one of mine that I'm sure even Gerry Fortin doesn't get to handle very often, an 1885-S! This coin is graded F 15 by PCGS. I've been proud to own it since 1999.

I just read about it as well, and I think it's a very bad idea. It will introduce additional confusion about grading, especially for new and casual collectors, for experienced collectors who are unfamiliar with this new system, and for publishers of price guides as well! One problem is that the same numbers are used in the current numerical system (Sheldon's numbers, but not really his concept) to denote low grade, worn coins ranging from Poor to Very Good. Additionally, there is no table translating the new numbers into equivalent the old ones, nor does it appear that both numbers would appear on the holder. I have a better idea. Let's get rid of numbers altogether and return to adjectival grading, with additional adjectives or letters for surface preservation, strike, and color or toning. NGC Ancients does something like this, and it provides a lot more information about the graders' evaluation of the coin!

I think that what @RWB means by his "Pony Express" comment is that the correct terminology is die "states", not die "stages", as in coaches. @Origami Master's question was about Lincoln cents, of which specimens from worn dies are generally disfavored by collectors. However, there are specialists who collect early (especially pre-1837) U.S. coins by die states. These specialists especially seek coins featuring the last known or "terminal" die state, which were struck shortly before the dies were retired or shattered. Such coins usually feature numerous interesting die cracks and "cuds" due to pieces having fallen out of the dies. Modern dies are more resilient and tend to tend to just produce lousy looking coins that lack luster and detail in their late states.

I agree with those who have previously responded. However, an exception would be the 1922 "Plain" or "No D" cent, which resulted from worn and repolished dies that produced coins on which the mint mark was practically invisible. If it were up to me, that one would have no value either. I've never wanted one.

I can't remember any coin I purchased because it did or didn't have clash marks. However, they are often interesting.

So far no one has posted an example of the Stars Obverse (1838-60) type. Here's an 1845 NGC graded MS 63, my only uncirculated specimen of this type. (Photos courtesy of Stack's Bowers Galleries.)

I agree that the correct grade range is MS 62-63, though I wouldn't be shocked if it were graded 64. The coin appears to be in a current NGC holder. Is it a private "knock-off"?

@GoldFinger1969--You can see light but continuous hairlining in the photos, particularly on the obverse. The coin itself when viewed at different angles has a slight shine like polished silverware. I have photos of 1796 and 1799 Draped Bust dollars that are numerically graded on the NGC Registry at Set Details | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com). I also have a Custom Set on the Registry entitled "Characteristics of Cleaned Coins" with photos and descriptions of specimens that have been details graded "cleaned" or that in my opinion were "cleaned" at Characteristics of "Cleaned" Coins - Custom Set (collectors-society.com). (Right click for menu to open the links.) In my opinion many coins that have been "cleaned" are still desirable when purchased at an appropriate discount.