Sandon

You should post questions like this in the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum, as the NGC staff does not provide such information. If you are asking in regard to a specific coin, please provide clear, cropped photos of both sides of the coin. I'm unclear whether you are asking about a coin that was struck twice, which is classified as a mint error, or a coin struck from a doubled die, which is classified as a die variety. For the former, see the examples of "double, triple, and multi-struck coins" at Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 2 | NGC (ngccoin.com). For the latter, see Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com). Both types of coins, if genuine, have collector value that depends on a number of factors. Regarding the latter, there are forms of "doubling" on coins that do not result from doubled dies and generally have no value, one of which is the machine (a.k.a. strike or mechanical) doubling referred to in the second link.

1890-S Liberty Seated dime, NGC graded AU 58:

1839 Liberty Seated dime, now NGC graded AU details, cleaned:

Unfortunately, the photos are too blurry to determine whether this 1955 cent exhibits doubling of any kind. If you are unable to provide clearer photos, I cannot render an opinion as to whether this coin was struck from a doubled die. You may want to check NGC VarietyPlus, PCGS Coinfacts, doubleddie.com, and varietyvista.com to see if you can find a match. Please be advised that NGC only attributes varieties that are listed on VarietyPlus. See What is a Variety? | NGC (ngccoin.com). Apart from the major (FS-101) variety, the only 1955 DDO variety that NGC attributes is FS-102. See Lincoln Cents, Wheat Reverse (1909-1958) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). I understand that PCGS only attributes Lincoln cent varieties listed in the Fivaz-Stanton book, The Cherrypickers Guide to Rare Die Varieties. See https://www.pcgs.com/varietyfaq. ANACS may attribute more obscure varieties, but it is doubtful that such varieties would have substantial market value. If your coin is an FS-102, you may wish to check auction records for this variety before deciding whether to submit this circulated example. Although you would learn by submitting the coin without taking these steps, I don't think that you should "learn the hard way", which is what I think @JKK means.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your purported 1794 silver dollars are obvious counterfeits, likely of the sort that have been mass produced in China over the past few decades. See 1794 BB-1,B-1 $1 MS | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com) for photos of a genuine example of this rare coin, of which fewer than 200 are believed to exist. All of these coins were struck from the same pair of ties, so the shapes and positions of all letters, numbers, stars and other design elements are identical on all genuine pieces. Note, just for example, the differences in the appearance of Liberty's face and hair and of the eagle on the genuine piece from the counterfeits.

@JoeF--This topic has nothing to do with mint-issued uncirculated coin sets, a.k.a. "mint sets" or the Special Mint Sets issued by the mint for the years 1965 to 1967. The topic author is claiming to have a purported special strike 1964 half dollar that, along with similar 1964 pieces of other denominations, were once thought to be a prototype for Special Mint Set coins, which now appears to have been an incorrect assumption. NGC has the most current published account of these pieces, which I will repeat here for your and other readers' benefit: Once thought to be prototypes for the Special Mint Set coins of 1965-67, the 1964 Specimen strikes do have a story to tell, but not that one. Starting in the 1950s, possibly dating to the arrival of Vladimir Clain-Steffanelli as curator in 1957, the Smithsonian's National Coin Collection received fresh strikes of each year's coinage through all or most of the 1970s. These were forwarded by the Philadelphia Mint and consisted of ordinary coinage of the type made for circulation, but the dies were fresh and sharp, retaining the satiny fields characteristic of new dies, along the with fine, irregular polishing lines also typical of new currency dies. This distribution was not known to anyone outside of either institution, and when perhaps a couple dozen sets of 1964(P) coins from cent through half dollar came into the market in the early 1990s, their distinctive appearance was noted. These coins brought strong premiums and still do in their rare appearances, but the term Special Mint Set does not apply to them. The obverse is the Normal Hair (non-Accented Hair, only used on proof coins) type, while the reverse is the Type 1 reverse, with a straight G in the FS designer's initials and breaks in rays 11-13 (counting from the left) where they meet stars. 1964 50C SP | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com) The PCGS Coinfacts account reads in pertinent part as follows: The 1964 Special Strike Kennedy Half dollars display very unique characteristics unseen on any other coins of the era. First of all, the strike is very sharp as it displays very clear details on both the obverse and the reverse. The coins also contain a smooth satin like appearance with the rims being very square and sharp. There are die polishing lines throughout the coins' surfaces. These coins also tend to lack contact marks unlike business strike coins, indicating that they were struck and handled under extreme care. Furthermore, the coins do not display the reflective surfaces that are usually encountered on proof coins. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1964-50c-sms/6844 The PCGS account states that all of these coins came from the estate of dealer Lester Merkin, which is now believed to be highly questionable, but it does appear that they had some special provenance and would not be found among ordinary 1964 coins. Some researchers, such as @RWB, have concluded that there is really nothing "special" about these coins and that they are simply regular circulation strikes struck from new dies. @FlyingAl is working on an article about these coins which will hopefully resolve the ongoing controversy about these coins. See https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/432734-comprehensive-research-on-the-so-called-1964-sms-coins-is-in-the-works-what-questions-do-members-here-have-about-these-coins. As for the topic author, he has claimed over the past few months to have found (1) a 1943 cent that is some sort of extreme rarity even though it sticks to a magnet and of which we have not seen photos, (2) a 1927 "Special Strike" nickel that was worn down to Very Good to Fine grade and turned out to have a "D" mintmark, and (3) this purported 1964 "SMS" Kennedy half dollar, which does not have satin fields, continuous die polish marks, square rims, or apparently other characteristics identified for these coins. Its photos indicate it to be an ordinary circulation strike 1964 Kennedy half dollar that is lightly worn and has been "cleaned".

1891-S Liberty Seated dime, ANACS graded MS 62 in old small holder:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please post clear photos of both sides of a coin about which you have questions, and please indicate just what it is that you would like to know. By "cropped", I mean that each image should show as little as possible of the surface surrounding the coin. Assuming that you are inquiring about the cause of the reddish or brownish color of this Jefferson nickel, I concur that this is likely due to environmental exposure or damage. U.S. nickels are composed of an alloy of 75% copper and only 25% nickel, and they can darken to such colors by being buried in the ground or being exposed to a variety of chemicals.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The Coin Marketplace forum is devoted to offers to sell or buy coins. A question such as yours should be posted on the Newbie Coin Collecting Questions forum. As your photos didn't post, please verify that they are in one of the permitted formats (gif, jpg, jpeg, jpe, png, or webp) and do not exceed a total of 4.88 MB.

No, the only feature notable about the coin on top are hairline scratches indicating that it has been abrasively "cleaned".

Is that a 1913-D or a 1913-S? In either case, it's a pretty nice find.

The Coin World experiment, which I think was back in the early 1990s, wasn't about favoritism among submitters. It was about whether the then eleven-point (60 to 70) system for grading mint state and (unworn) proof coins was capable of being consistently applied in the first place. As I recall, a number of individual coins received different--sometimes several point different--grades when resubmitted to the same grading service. I thought, "this numerical grading nonsense ends here and now", but it didn't.

Duplicate post. Photos of the reverse were posted as a separate topic. Both sides indicate that the coin was severely scraped and is not a mint error.

Photos of the obverse were posted as a separate topic, which is also undesirable. This is not intended to be overly critical, just to help you learn how to use the chat board.

Your 1885 has a beveled edge, not the square edge of a proof, and abrasions on Liberty's cheek that are indicative of its having come from a bag. There are flecks of mint frost in the fields that are consistent with the coin's being a prooflike circulation strike, not a proof. Actual proof Morgan dollars are quite different in appearance from prooflike circulation strikes.

That appears to be a scrape, as indicated by the displaced metal piled along its sides. As a result, the coin likely wouldn't be worth saving. The only other possibility would be that the coin was struck through foreign matter on the die (a minor mint error), but the displaced metal wouldn't be present, and there would be luster inside the depression. In the future, please crop your photos so that they show as little as possible of the surface surrounding the coin.

Your "Crossing the Delaware" quarter is a 2021-D, not a 2021-P. I'm not sure to what "line" you are referring. Everything I see on the coin appears to be correct for its design. See 2021 P Crossing the Delaware 25C MS | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com). If you still see something that doesn't seem normal for this coin, please be specific as to its location or provide closeups. If you want to preserve this coin in its present condition, you should not hold it in your bare hands, except by its edge if you must. Skin oils cause coins to develop spots and discoloration.

Please post cropped photos of each side of a coin about which you have questions. Based on the current photos, the coin has a reverse die crack and some light strike doubling (a.k.a. machine or mechanical doubling) on the date, not die doubling. These characteristics may be interesting, but they are neither rare nor give the coin significant value. I recommend that you review the following articles: Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com), https://www.doubleddie.com/144801.html and links therein on mechanical doubling (a.k.a. strike or machine doubling), die deterioration doubling, and abrasion doubling.

Can you provide a link to the page at PCGS regarding this 1999-D (not 1999) wide AM variety?

Sorry, but I don't see a photo inserted into the initial post. Check that it is of an acceptable file type and size and that it was successfully uploaded.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Based on the photos, this 1943-S cent does appear to be a lightly circulated example that was replated (a.k.a. "reprocessed"), as indicated by the flatness on Lincoln's cheek and the shiny (not frosty) surfaces. The edge on an original coin should be dull, as the zinc coating occurred before the planchets were punched from the planchet strip. If the edge is shiny, this is further evidence that the coin was replated. The coin doesn't appear to be the so-called "1943 over 2" variety either. See photos at Lincoln Cents, Wheat Reverse (1909-1958) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com).

It is a close AM, as it should be. The A and M nearly touch. To my knowledge, no one has ever found a 1999-D cent with a wide AM. What source, if any, told you that the 1999-D cent is known to exist with a wide AM?

Supposedly, the graders at reputable grading services are not allowed to know whose coins they are grading. The contention that large submitters receive better grades than others is an often-repeated contention for which no one to my knowledge has provided credible evidence. A number of the several dozen coins from my collection that I have submitted to NGC received numerical grades higher than I expected, and I'm certainly not a large submitter. (I've had a few disappointing experiences as well.) On the other hand, I once heard a well-known representative of a major numismatic auction house complain that PCGS had refused to attribute certain early U.S. coins as proofs despite their having previously been attributed and sold as such; and I have read major auctioneers' catalog descriptions that questioned the accuracy of the grades given by grading services. The real problem as I see it is the interplay of (1) the complexity and subjectivity of the current numerical grading "system" and (2) the inherent pressure on grading services from all customers to satisfy them with generous grades. Experienced graders may reasonably disagree over whether a coin should receive a grade of, for example, 64, 64+, or 65. The difference in list prices from 64 to 65 may be substantial, and concern that any customer may go to a competitor could result in the coin being given the benefit of the doubt. Smaller submitters who think that their coins were just as nice as pieces sold by major dealers or auction houses at higher grades may assume that these large submitters receive special considerations, which is probably what leads to the contentions of favoritism in the first place.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The coin was struck from worn dies, which on copper plated zinc cents sometimes results in a warped area near the rim. The presence of the rim indicates that the collar was in place, so the coin isn't broadstruck. I see no indication of its having been struck through any foreign object or matter. We can't tell whether the dies were rotated out of the normal "coin turn" orientation from the photos provided.

The onus isn't on us to explain why your perfectly ordinary looking 1964 Kennedy half dollar isn't one of the so-called (and misnamed) 1964 "SMS" coins. You're the one who is claiming that it is one, so the burden is on you to make a credible case that it is. Should you make such a case, then we might have something worthy of discussion. I assume that you would have carefully studied the available literature and photos regarding these extremely rare and controversial pieces before claiming that you have one. What characteristics does it have that distinguishes it from ordinary circulation strike pieces (over 273 million minted), and from what if any special provenance did it come that would support a position that it could be one of these purported special strikes? You have now claimed to have found three different extremely rare coins. What part of EXTREMELY RARE don't you understand?