Sandon

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.

I'm not sure whether you mean by a "film" that the 1889 Morgan dollar has a foreign substance stuck to its reverse--which would be bad--or simply has a difference in color that would constitute "toning" (formerly known as tarnish), which some collectors like nowadays. The coin appears to grade About Uncirculated, perhaps lightly "cleaned", but not a bad coin for a casual or budget collector. Regrettably, I suspect that the 1909-S V.D.B. you bought for your former girlfriend has an added mintmark. NGC (and others) have identified the 1909-S V.D.B. Lincoln cent as the most counterfeited or altered of all U.S. coins! It's unwise to buy one of these uncertified by a major grading service unless you're an expert! See 1. 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cent | NGC (ngccoin.com) for the characteristics of genuine specimens. (Right click the link for menu to open).

What is your question? If you believe the coin has doubling, where? I see none in your photos, which are fuzzy.

NGC graded this coin "VF Details, Cleaned", as I had expected.

@GoldFinger1969--I doubt that this could be done for "classic" coins or even modern coins made for circulation because they vary so much in strike, luster, location and severity of abrasions, toning, and other effects of environmental exposure, as well as the undefinably subjective "eye appeal". As for untoned modern collector issues, they could possibly be graded 68-70 by computer because they all look virtually alike--which is why they really don't need to be graded as anything other than Superb Gem Uncirculated or Proof anyway! Even for these issues, how could a computer be programmed to evaluate the positive or negative impact of toning, which varies infinitely in color, pattern, extent, location, and intensity?

I recall that back around 1990 PCGS and others spent a great deal of money trying to create a computer program to grade coins. It didn't work then and wouldn't now. Grading is by its nature is subjective and nuanced and involves a variety of factors that can't be precisely measured. There could never be a precise set of instructions that would enable a computer to precisely grade coins to the general approval of collectors.

@pigeonman333rd-- So far as I know, no recognized, responsible numismatic source has identified any 2022 quarter as "rare" or valuable. "Couch collectables"--whatever that is--is not such a source. There are a number of dishonest or ignorant hucksters on the internet who claim that "rare" coins can be found in pocket change, which is almost never true. Even most legitimate mint errors aren't rare or valued by collectors.

I assume you mean Certificate Verification. NGC has this feature too. Go to the NGC home page (www.ngccoin.com), click on the "Resources" tab at the top of the page, and select "Verify NGC Certification". You need to enter the grade of the coin from the drop-down menu as well as the certificate number.

I thought this one was completely "as struck" until I checked the specimens of this quarter in one of my own 2022 mint sets and realized that the name "NINA OTERO-WARREN" is incuse (struck into instead of above the field), so scratches and nicks in the field wouldn't go through the lettering. It still appears that there are raised lumps in and around the "O" and below the peak of the "W", which could be die chips or roughness from improper die preparation. This would constitute a minor mint error. (I don't think it would have anything to do with the feeder fingers.)

The discoloration and corrosion on this coin are likely just due to exposure to the elements, a.k.a. "environmental damage". It also may have been stained with some pink substance. Remember that "nickels" are actually composed of an alloy of 75% copper, 25% nickel. The copper is especially prone to discoloration and corrosion. Another site you might check out to identify errors is www.error-ref.com, which comprehensively catalogs known error types.

This coin was bent and otherwise damaged, possibly by being run over by a vehicle, with the reverse against the pavement, which would have caused the rough surface a.k.a. "road rash".

The scrapes on the reverse in your first three photos are clearly damage from a coin counting or roll wrapping machine, which frequently occur during the distribution process. The large nick on Washington's cheek and the other obverse nicks and scratches are likely damage the coin incurred in a mint bag from coin-to-coin contact. It's conceivable that the large nick is a "strike through" from scrap on the die, but such an impression is generally shallower, and I think I see displaced metal along its sides, which indicate that it was created after the coin was struck.

You may wish to determine whether the seller would be willing to take the coin back for a refund. NGC might correct the designation without charge, but you would probably have to pay the shipping and would still have a coin you don't want and have to dispose of. (You may want to contact NGC about this.) This is why it's important to ignore that little paper tag and carefully inspect any coin that you wish to purchase. If you can't inspect the coin in-person or at least a clear high-resolution photo, you might not want to buy it.

I agree that this is a "Reverse of '40" with weak steps. On the Reverse of '38 the steps are lighter and slightly "wavy", while on the Reverse of '40 the steps are straighter and deeper. More significantly as I see it, the whole area of the steps on the Reverse of '38 has a relatively "flat" appearance, while on the Reverse of '40 that area has a more "rounded" appearance. (On the Reverse of '38 the triangular edges of the area supported by the pillars are a little sharper than on the Reverse of '40, but I consider this a minor difference that may be difficult to discern.) If the grading services recognize these varieties, they should make sure that their graders are properly trained to recognize them! Given the cost of third-party certification, I find the frequency of errors like this troubling.