Sandon

I wouldn't buy coins from any Chinese website! Apart from any internet security issues, I understand that Chinese law doesn't prohibit the counterfeiting of coins of any other countries or of pre-1949 Chinese coins. As a result, there are huge numbers of fakes of varying quality of both older and modern U.S. coins being manufactured in China and offered on these websites. Some are immediately recognizable as fakes by experienced collectors, and others are rather deceptive, especially from photos. Frankly, I recommend avoiding purchasing coins from the internet other than sites of well-known, reputable dealers and auction houses. Even then, there is no substitute for in-person examination of coins at coin shows, shops and auction lot viewings. This is true for everyone but especially for new collectors!

Proof dies by their nature are highly polished, which often results in the loss of some lower relief detail. I've never heard of anyone placing any value on this characteristic or seeking out such pieces. That doesn't mean that you can't find it interesting! (I often prefer to buy the "uncirculated" versions of modern mint commemoratives, as they may show more fine detail than the proofs, as well as usually having lower mintages.)

I had to think about it for a while, but by "MD" I assume that you mean "mint damage". I don't see any damage or anything else unusual about this proof nickel. I assume that the scratches appearing in the field above Monticello are on the plastic of the case of the 2002 proof set in which this coin is housed.

I don't have any settings on my digital microscope other than for focusing and to turn its lights up and down. I've found both brilliant uncirculated and proof coins difficult to photograph because of the glare but have gotten the best results by turning off the lights on the scope and instead using a gooseneck lamp whose light hits the coin at an angle. I have to experiment with the position and angle of the lamp, and some parts of the coin are still too bright or dark, but the result is good enough for my purposes (registry set or posting here). I crop and occasionally make adjustments using the photo editing software in my personal computer. This is a 1943 steel cent in a PCGS "rattler" holder graded MS 66:

I understand that the wartime composition (1942-45) five cent pieces have the same 21.2 mm diameter as all others since the 1883 Liberty nickels. The "Redbook" so indicates. They all fit in the same album openings. Where did anyone see a claim for a different diameter?

This is clearly a copper core, indicating that this is an ordinary copper nickel clad 1973-D half dollar. Compare this edge to that of any 1965-70 silver clad half dollar.

May we see the edge of this coin? A bright red (uncirculated) or brown (circulated) edge will demonstrate that the coin has a copper core, not the approximately 21% silver core of a silver clad piece, which is much lighter in color.

There are at least 33 different die varieties of 1853 large cents, as shown on NGC "VarietyPlus" (under the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page), most of which are identified largely by the placement of the date, which varied from die to die. This is true for most U.S. coins from about 1836 until about 1908, when most production dies were prepared from a "hub" (master die) that usually included all of the design elements, but the date (and any mint mark, until the 1990s) was still punched into the die. (Occasionally, new varieties of earlier U.S. coins such as large cents are still discovered.) I am quite familiar with this series. Based on your photos, I also see nothing that would identify your coin as a counterfeit, although the color seems a little dark. I see nothing unusual about the "denticles", usually referred to as "border beads" on coins made in close collars like these. (It is almost certainly not a "contemporary" counterfeit that was made as money in the 1850s, as these are rather crude.) I heard some years ago of counterfeits of common date Braided Hair large cents that were made from "spark erosion" or other copy dies that were modeled from genuine coins, and there are now all sorts of fakes coming from China. However, the genuine pieces are so common that the odds of buying a counterfeit from an established coin dealer would seem rather low. It would require in-person examination and tests of the actual coin itself to say more. These coins are supposed to weigh approximately 10.89 grams. What does your scale say?

Virtually all circulation strike silver dollars have noticeable marks and abrasions from decades of storage in thousand-coin bags that were piled on top of each other and sometimes thrown around! Even coins graded MS 67 or better have some such marks, while coins graded "63" or lower are usually quite heavily marked. The "market grading" used by the grading services (and even the current 7th edition ANA grading guide, of which you may wish to obtain a copy) considers the number, location and severity of marks as only one factor for determining the grade. Other factors the type and intensity of luster, quality of strike, whether the coin is brilliant or dull or attractively or unattractively toned, and its overall "eye appeal". Your coin is well struck, has intense brilliant luster, and believe it or not, is not heavily bag marked for a Peace dollar, resulting in a "64" ("Very Choice") grade. (If it were up to me, we would grade coins with adjectives, not numbers, which imply an objective and precise determination of grade, which is impossible!) The coin has a small, retained lamination (not "delamination", which would mean it had peeled off) that probably doesn't affect its value. This would be probably considered poor quality control rather than a mint error. If this is what you find interesting and enjoy collecting, you should do so, as such pieces can often be found without having to pay a premium for them.

I assume that you're trying to add the coin while you're looking at the set itself. Try opening the "My Competitive Coins" panel on the left side of the page. Go to the coin in question and clicking the green "+" in a circle in the "Add to Sets" column at the far right. I just tried this for a Hard Times token in my list, for which there is currently no competitive set, and instead of the dialog box I described before there was one saying the following: "The competitive NGC Registry doesn't accept this coin yet. This often means that the coin is new. If you think this coin should be accepted, let us know." Click on the "let us know", which should be lit in blue. This should take you through the categories, set, and slot in which you want to place the coin, which will be referred to the administrator. I hope this helps.

Have you tried when using the "Add to Sets" function in your coin list and it doesn't show any eligible sets, clicking on the "I'm looking for something else" that appears in blue at the bottom of the dialog box? It should take you through steps to indicate the category, set and exact slot in which you wish to place the coin. Your specific request will then be referred to an administrator. (I assume that this is the first slot in your set under "Flying Eagle Cents, 1856-1858, Circulation and Proof Issues". It's a nice set!)

In fact, the mintage of 1964-D nickels was over 1.787 billion, which is still the highest mintage for any Jefferson nickel! Based on what I can see from your photos, this one has a retail value of at most a dollar or two, assuming it's uncirculated. You can buy uncertified uncirculated Jefferson nickels of many dates and mints going back to 1938 from dealers at coin shows or shops for prices ranging from 25 cents to $10 and store them safely and attractively in a Whitman or Dansco album (not folder) that I think can still be purchased for less than $25. Even the "key" 1939-D and 1942-D are relatively inexpensive in decent uncirculated grades. There's a lot less cost and space involved. I have a complete 1938-64 set, all uncirculated, in a Whitman album that I put together mostly in the 1970s and 80s. The album has preserved the coins in the same condition as I purchased them.

Thanks for the compliments, but I don't think this coin will be numerically graded. It would be somewhere in the VF range if it hadn't been polished. Most early U.S. coins have some level of impairment, but some like this one are attractive nevertheless. I own a total of three Draped Bust dollars, each purchased uncertified in the 1990s, the 1800 in 1990 followed by a 1796 large date small letters (small eagle, of course) and a 1799, both at a 1996 Bowers & Merena auction. They're among my best coins. I won't be buying any more at today's prices! I had the 1799 (unimpaired) graded at NGC earlier this year, and it was graded VF 30, close to the VF 25 catalog grade. It's a little stronger than the 1800, despite having been struck from a worn reverse die. Its photos can be seen in my NGC Registry type sets, such as "Sandon's Incidental Type Set" at Set Details | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com) (right click for menu to open). The 1796 is also presently at NGC and will fill the slot for the small eagle reverse type. It was catalogued as a F 15 and should grade at least F 12. [Added 11/9/22--NGC graded the 1796 VF 25!] As for the photography, I'm a pretty raw amateur myself. I've owned a "Plugable" brand digital microscope for about a year and a half. I plug it into my personal computer. It's on a short stand that doesn't permit the taking of a photo of an entire side of a coin larger than a nickel without its being placed on piles of books of varying heights. The stack to photograph a silver dollar sized coin is quite high! I constantly have to adjust the focus on the scope and the angle and position of the lamp I use for light, as well as sometimes using the light on the scope itself. Each coin is different. To photograph the edge of this coin, I had to grip the coin by the edge and turn it for each shot until I had captured all of the edge. There's some overlap.

@Cing--I do not appreciate your posing as a new, uninformed collector with a legitimate question that I spent a fair amount of time trying to answer fully. Respectfully, I have reason to believe that you are still "pulling our leg" about the coin in the PCGS photo (graded PR 66 with a price guide value of $2) having been taken from a mint rather than a proof set. The coin appears to be a proof based on its mirror surface, highly polished dies, lack of abrasions, marks or planchet roughness on Jefferson's cheek and elsewhere, and, most significantly, the full steps on Monticello. If it did in fact come from a mint set, "the joke's on you" because a 1970-S circulation strike nickel graded MS 66 with "full steps" lists $3,850 in the same price guide! (Proofs usually have full steps, while uncirculated coins with them from that era are often rare and avidly collected.) Yes, grading services do make mistakes. I have an 1873-S with arrows dime that was erroneously certified by NGC as just 1873 arrows, even though the mint mark is visible on NGC's photo of the coin! Coins with wrong dates and types printed on the labels are seen with some frequency. The grading services refer to these as "clerical errors" and will correct the error free of charge but won't pay warranty claims on them if they should have been obvious to a collector. It doesn't help when people incorrectly fill out the submission form, especially when it is intentional.

Whether or not these items should be classified as counterfeits, they are not "coins", a Webster's dictionary definition of "coin" being "[a] piece of metal marked and issued by governmental authority to be used as money". (The overstriking of actual coins with different dates or design elements presumably destroys their legal status as coins.) While there is no problem with knowledgeable people collecting them, it's a very real problem that they closely resemble actual coin designs and may be used as a means to deceive and defraud those who are not numismatically knowledgeable--the vast majority of the population! "Copy" stamps have been obliterated and may not be noticed or understood. In my opinion our hobby would be better off without the creation and distribution of such items, although my libertarian leanings make me reluctant to recommend any legal prohibitions.

Below are photos of an 1800 Draped Bust silver dollar (Very Wide Date, Low 8 "Redbook" variety) that I bought at a local coin auction in December 1990, when prices for this type were much lower than they are now. The auctioneer described this coin as Extremely Fine, but I realized at the time that it is a lightly polished Very Fine and bid accordingly. It is still an attractive coin. I recently submitted it to NGC and expect a "VF Details" grade. I have been reluctant to submit coins with lettered or decorated edges to grading services because the holder at least partly obscures the edge. The edge should be considered the "third side" of a coin and is important for numismatic study and authentication. This particular coin has a perfectly impressed edge, and I took a series of photos showing the entire edge before submitting the coin. All 1794-1803 original U.S. silver dollars show on the edge the words "HUNDRED CENTS ONE DOLLAR OR UNIT" with decorative stars, circles and rectangles between the words. Many of the numerous counterfeits, copies, and replicas of these coins do not correctly duplicate this edge style or even have plain or reeded edges. (Bear in mind, however, that some of the genuine coins have blundered edges.)

@EagleRJO--Surely you know that all annual U.S. proof sets since 1968 and all the coins they contained were minted in San Francisco! The last proof sets minted in Philadelphia are dated 1964. Do I need to tell you to study the Redbook too?

An 1806 British halfpenny or penny (the "Britannia" on the reverse indicates it is British, not Irish) isn't worth much in this low a grade whether genuine or counterfeit. My Standard Catalog of World Coins from 2004 doesn't have a weight for these, so I can't tell which one it is. You can check the current values on the NGC World Coin Price Guide under the "Resources" tab on the NGC home page. The pertinent catalog numbers are KM# 662 for the halfpenny, KM# 663 for the penny.

In 1970 the San Francisco mint (then technically an assay office) made nearly 239 million five cent pieces (nickels) for circulation. They are still occasionally found in change. When they have no wear, they are referred to as "uncirculated" or "mint state". Of these some 2 million were included in the uncirculated coin or "mint" sets sold that year, including the one you removed. These circulation strike coins are distinct from the mirror-like proofs included in the over 2.6 million proof sets sealed in hard plastic holders sold by the mint in 1970. Almost none of the circulation strikes (mostly worth less than $1) or the proofs (mostly worth $1-$2) would be worth the $40 or more that you would have to spend in grading fees, processing fees, shipping and insurance costs that you would spend to have a single coin certified by PCGS or NGC. "S" mint cents dated from 1968 to 1974 and nickels made from 1968 to 1970 were made by the hundreds of millions for circulation, unlike the other denominations after 1968 and later issues that were only made in San Francisco in proof format. They are only worth any substantial money in very high and rare grades (like MS 67 or PF 70) or if proofs when they are also "deep mirror cameos". You will need to learn a great deal more about coins before you even think about sending any to grading services! You must "buy the book before the coin". To that end please refer to my following post, which will inform you as to the basic publications and online resources that you will need to become a successful collector:

@pigeonman333rd: While the photos are far too small for a proper examination, the narrow border on this coin indicates that it is a circulation strike. (I can also see that it's a 1909 V.D.B., which is quite rare as a matte proof, with 400-600 believed to have been issued as opposed to nearly 28 million circulation strikes.) The matte proofs have a broader border, a finely grainy finish, a very strong strike, and a squared off (not beveled) edge. Because these differences are subtle, I would only buy pieces that have been third party certified as proofs. (You can see photos of actual matte proofs on NGC Coin Explorer, PCGS CoinFacts, and the online archives of major auction houses.) As previously requested, please post your inquiries about specific coins as new topics, not on someone else's unrelated old topic. What does this coin have to do with a 1921 Peace dollar! IF YOU DO THIS AGAIN, I WON'T RESPOND!

@Quintus Arrius: My own grade for the 1909-S would be F-VF (F 15), but I've seen pieces that look like this graded as high as VF 25 by grading services. (Both of us probably learned grading during the era of Photograde, whose standards I still prefer for circulated coins.) I think its price was $95, plus $2 shipping (cheaper in 1989), for a total of $97. My grade for the 1877 would be VG 10, but it could go F 12 at NGC, although the weak right upper obverse rim and minor surface issues could pull it down to VG 8. Grading always involves some subjectivity! I'll edit the posts to show the NGC grades when I receive them.

Here's another coin that I took from my Whitman Indian cent album after decades of storage, a 1909-S, the lowest mintage issue in the series. I bought this coin from a classified ad in Coin World in May 1989 for $97. While this may have been a risky way to buy a coin that even in those days was prone to having an added mint mark, I've matched the mint mark size, style and position to photos of genuine specimens. (Only one die pair is known to have been used for the 1909-S.) Although as I recall the coin was sold as in Fine condition, I believe it should grade Very Fine by current standards. I have submitted this coin to NGC for authentication and grading. Edit 11/15/22: NGC graded this coin XF 40! In my opinion there's just too much wear on "LIBERTY", the feathers, and the ribbon to warrant an Extremely Fine grade.

I assume that this is a different coin from the purported 1959-D wheat cent that has been sold at auction for as much as $50,000 notwithstanding disclosure that ANACS, NGC, and PCGS have all rendered a "no decision" response regarding its authenticity. (The Secret Service thought it was genuine!) See https://www.numismaticnews.net/us-coins/50000-for-a-1959-d-lincoln-cent-mule. Based upon the photos in that article, it appears to me to have a softened appearance, suggesting that it is a copy made from two different coins. Does anyone have a photo of the purported 1959 wheat cent to which the ANACS certificate pertains, such as the one on the certificate?

Both the standard and deluxe ("Mega") editions of the "Redbook" contain glossaries with basic numismatic terminology, although they are certainly not exhaustive. That's one of the reasons why both are featured in my summary of "Resources for New Collectors" referred to in my posting under that name and referenced by @EagleRJO. The meaning of most words can be determined by checking them in a search engine. While @JKK and others are welcome to start a posting on this, I'm not sure how we could keep it all together in alphabetical order or agree on the definitions. The person who wants to call his 1943 steel or post-mint plated cent a rare "silver penny" will still do so without even looking for such a resource, and as I found out, may take offense at our efforts at education.

Your coin exhibits shelf-like "strike doubling" caused by a die that was loose in the press, which collectors generally don't regard as "something special." Notice how the letters "DO" and probably others not in your photo show similar doubling. There is an 1884-CC "doubled CC" variety (VAM 5) caused by a repunched mint mark, which shows doubling on the mint mark only and more strongly on the first "C". You can check your Morgan dollars for varieties on the "VAM World" site at www.vamworld.com, which lists all known die varieties, or at NGC "VarietyPlus" (home page under the "Resources" tab), which lists the more popular ones that NGC will attribute. (The 1884-CC VAM 5 isn't one of them.)