Sandon

The New Rochelle commemorative has some light reddish-brown toning around the edges on both sides, which is especially noticeable on the obverse photo. When I photograph coins in certified holders, I have to use a desk lamp aimed from the side and some distance away for illumination instead of the LEDs built into my digital microscope to prevent the reflection from the holder "washing out" most of the photo. This often results in photos of silver coins taking on a slightly reddish tint, a "lesser evil". Here is a pre-certification photo of an 1891 Morgan dollar, now NGC graded MS 63, illuminated in part by the LEDs, with a more whitish appearance:

Welcome to the NGC chat board. NGC has taken photos of the coins it has certified in their holders since October 2008. See NGC Security Center | NGC (ngccoin.com). Coins certified by NGC before that date generally do not have photos. Coins minted in 2020 and 2022 should have photos, although the photos are occasionally missing or of the wrong coins, which is likely what happened here. If when you entered the serial numbers of the coins into the Registry (or "My Competitive Coins"), and the coins were correctly identified, that means that the unique serial numbers on your holders correspond to coins that are in genuine holders with those specific serial numbers. You can also verify this and see any NGC photos on the "Verify NGC Certification" tool referred to on the previously linked Security Center page or at NGC Cert Lookup | Verify NGC Certification | NGC (ngccoin.com). There have been instances of counterfeit or misdescribed coins in counterfeit or tampered with grading service holders, including holders bearing serial numbers that correspond with genuine coins described on the holder labels. See the portion of the Security Center page on "NGC holder and label security features" and on "identifying fraudulent holders". There is no standard weight for an NGC or other grading service holder, so you cannot determine the weight of the coins by weighing the holders. Moreover, a coin's being the correct weight is no guarantee that it is genuine. Most of the modern (likely Chinese) counterfeits that we have seen on these forums are recognizable because they show obvious differences in their lettering, numbers and/or other details or appearance from genuine coins. Even if you only buy coins in the holders of reputable grading services, you should become familiar with what the coins you collect are supposed to look like. In my opinion, certification is not, and can never be, a substitute for acquiring your own numismatic knowledge. It is also helpful to buy coins from reputable, established dealers.

Plating blisters are abundantly common on copper plated zinc cents made since 1982, especially those dated from 1982 until the early1990s, but they are also found on other coins to date. See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=plating+blisters for details and photos. They are considered to be a quality control issue and generally have no collector value.

@PricelssPeace-- Welcome to the NGC chat board. Your inquiry would likely receive more attention from forum members if posted as a new topic in the "U.S., World, and Ancient Coins" forum or the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum instead of as a reply to someone else's essentially unrelated topic from nearly five years ago. The item about which you were inquiring started out as an uncirculated 1976-S silver clad (40% silver) bicentennial reverse Eisenhower dollar, which was included in approximately 4.9 million three-coin bicentennial collectors' sets, which are very common. Subsequently, a private party counterstamped the coin with an image commemorating the 250th anniversary of George Washington's birth in 1982. NGC was apparently willing to grade and encapsulate some of these counterstamped coins as collectors' items of a kind sometimes referred to as "exonumia". NGC certificate verification doesn't provide any information beyond what is printed on the label and doesn't indicate how many have been made or graded by NGC. Verify NGC Certification | NGC (ngccoin.com). Presumably, the person or organization who counterstamped the coin used a dollar because it was large enough to accommodate the counterstamp, which a Washington quarter could not. Unfortunately, I don't have any further information about this counterstamp. Hopefully, another forum member can tell you more.

No. I don't see the light downward doubling and "notching" on the "9" and "4" of the date of your coin that shows clearly on the Variety Vista ("VV") photos. The leftward doubling on the "1" of your coin, which isn't on the VV photos, appears to be strike doubling, and the light downward "notching" on the top of the "1" in the VV photos doesn't show on your photos. The reverse die used to strike your coin is definitely different from that used to strike the coin in the "VV" photos, as the mintmark is in a distinctly different position. The die cracks on your coin are similar but not as extensive, apparently lacking the crack through the cap. Dies for particular types often crack in the same places, indicating that these are areas of particular stress. If matching doubling were visible, the coin might be an earlier die state of the DDO-003 variety, but matching doubling would be vital to identify it as this doubled die variety.

1938 New Rochelle commemorative half dollar, PCGS graded MS 66, a new acquisition:

1895-O Morgan dollar, now NGC graded XF 40:

Although the coin is slightly below tolerance at 26.55 grams--0.097 gram against the statutory weight of 26.73 grams, resulting in a minimum legal weight of 26.633 grams--a scale is unnecessary to determine the counterfeit status of this coin. I took the liberty of downloading and show below the PCGS photo of what is widely considered to be the finest known 1895-O dollar, the only one graded MS 67 by PCGS, with none graded that high at NGC. This coin was once in the Jack Lee collection and was last sold at auction for $528,000 in November 2020 as part of the Larry Miller collection. If you compare this photo to those of the originally posted piece, you will note many differences in the fine details of the genuine "gem" example to that piece in addition to those I originally noted, as well as obvious differences in the crispness of those details and in the luster of the two pieces. The "look" of the counterfeit is quite different from that of the genuine coin, which despite its high grade shows evidence of coin-to-coin contact on Liberty's cheek, while the counterfeit shows none. As the late Yogi Berra is said to have said, "You can see a lot just by looking".

@The old expert--Welcome to the NGC chat board. As indicated by @NickiO CS, your topic would best be posted on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum, with cropped photos of both sides of the coin, where it will get more attention from other forum members. From your uncropped obverse photo, it appears that your circulated 1988 Lincoln cent has plating blisters, which are all too common on copper plated zinc Lincoln cents, especially those from 1982 to the early 1990s. See Plating Blisters (error-ref.com). for a detailed explanation and photos. These blisters are generally regarded by knowledgeable collectors as a quality control issue, not a mint error, and are not attributed by third-party grading services. If you enjoy collecting them, you are welcome to do so, but please do not represent to others that they are rare or have significant market value. It doesn't "bring back the excitement of Coin Collecting for a new generation" when members of that generation are induced by sellers on certain websites to part with their hard-earned money to purchase such coins at a premium, only to find that they are unsaleable in the mainstream numismatic marketplace. @808maka--Welcome to you as well. Your inquiry should have been posted as a separate topic, also on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum, with cropped, clear photos of both sides of your coin. From what I can see, what you have is a normal 1977-D Roosevelt dime, one of 376,607,228 reported minted, which in its circulated condition is worth its face value of ten cents.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. The "coin" in the holder is clearly counterfeit. Among other things, the date and mintmark appear to be too large, and Liberty's face and mouth appear misshapen. Moreover, "blast white" gem uncirculated 1895-O are extremely rare and when they do appear sell for six figures. A genuine 1895-O Morghan dollar graded MS 65 is valued at $225,000 in the NGC Price Guide. See 1895 O $1 MS | Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com). Such a coin would not appear in such a holder. Unfortunately, buying a coin in what purports to be the holder of a reputable grading service doesn't guarantee that one is buying a genuine coin either. A dealer at a coin show I attended last weekend told me that someone had walked into his shop with what purported to be ten uncirculated 1885-CC Morgan dollars in PCGS holders with labels bearing the MS 65 grade. The coins and the holders were all counterfeits. This is why it is highly important for all collectors to learn basic authentication and grading skills and become familiar with the appearance of genuine examples of coins they want to collect, including those who collect only certified coins.

The anomalous reverse of the originally posted 1969 Lincoln cent doesn't resemble the examples of coins struck through cloth shown at https://www.error-ref.com/?s=struck+through+cloth. Note that the struck through areas of those coins do not appear discolored or blotchy like those on the posted coin. It appears to me to be a foreign substance that is raised above the original surface of the coin, although it is possible that it could appear different in hand. The most likely explanation, which is usually the correct one, is that the coin was mounted on some surface and subsequently removed, leaving the residue of the mounting material on the reverse. If you aren't satisfied with our explanations and still believe that this coin exhibits some form of mint error, you may consider submitting it to CONECA as I believe we discussed on one of your previous topics. The second coin whose photos you posted appears to have been crushed by a vise or other tool whose surface imparted the pattern on one side and also caused the damage on the other side. Compare it to the photos of the 1941 cent at https://www.error-ref.com/squeeze-job-or-vice-job-or-garage-job/.

To the contrary, the Philadelphia mint produced a reported 155,164,000 1971 half dollars without mint marks. The Denver mint produced a reported 302,097,424 pieces with the "D" mint mark. Your coin was damaged in the area where the mint mark would have been as well as circulated. The brown rim indicates that the coin is the normal copper-nickel clad alloy with a copper core. It has no collector value. (If you thought the coin had any such value, you should not touch it with your bare fingers, except by its edges if you must.) To obtain accurate information about U.S. coins, you should acquire a current (2024, 2025 edition expected in or about April) of A Guide Book of United States Coins, commonly known as the "Red Book". It is available from its publisher at whitman.com and at some booksellers. You can also obtain information at PCGS Coinfacts (https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts) or the NGC Coin Explorer (Online Coin Catalog Search Page - Coin Explorer | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Please post a photo of the other side of the coin. Based on what I can see so far, this does not appear to be a genuine overstruck coin or other mint error but rather what is known as a "vice job" or "squeeze job" where someone took this quarter and a Memorial reverse Lincoln cent and squeezed the two together, causing an incuse image of the cent reverse to be impressed on the quarter's obverse. See https://www.error-ref.com/squeeze-job-or-vice-job-or-garage-job/. It is highly unlikely that a struck quarter could be overstruck by cent dies, as the quarter would not fit in the cent press. Moreover, the cent image would be raised and not be backwards. Such as alteration created outside the mint would have no collector value.

1941-S Lincoln cent, scarcer "Large S" variety, NGC graded MS 66 RD (unattributed). Purchased today at a coin show.

1860 Indian cent, now NGC graded MS 62:

Based on your question, I assumed that you were unfamiliar with the process of creating a registry set and provided information that you probably didn't need. Your slot request should enable the Administrator to deal with your problem next week. It appears that your coins are die states of varieties already included in the set. In the future, you might try using the "Add to Sets" button, and if the desired set doesn't appear, click the "I'm Looking for Something Else" link at the bottom of the dialog box and go through the steps to indicate an existing set and/or slot in which you think the coin should be placed. I have successfully done this on several occasions.

The holders with the dark green inserts are Coin World holders that can be purchased by anyone at amosadvantage.com and used to keep uncertified coins in slab boxes. They can easily be opened and re-closed. If, as here, the labels don't purport them to be a product of a third-party grading service, I wouldn't classify them as a "basement slabber" product.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. If you have entered the serial numbers of these holders into your "coin list" ("My Competitive Coins"), you should click the green plus sign ("+") in the pertinent slot under the "Add to Sets" column. You should then see a list of your existing registry sets for which the coin is eligible, if any, followed by a section with a blue plus sign to "Create New Set", which will give you a list of the sets for which these coins would be eligible. Click this section and follow the instructions to create one or more of these sets. This would include a selection of both standard date and mint Morgan dollar sets and a "Hot 50" VAMS set. Alternatively, also assuming that you have already entered these coins into your "coin list", you can go to United States Categories | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com), pick one or more appropriate sets under the "Morgan Dollars" category, and use the "Autobuild" button to create each such set. If you are only interested in a "Hot 50" set, go to Morgan Dollars, 1878-1921, Hot 50 VAMs Sets | NGC Registry | NGC (ngccoin.com) and hit the green "Create a set" button at the left above the list of sets. There are extensive instructions for the NGC Registry under the "About" and "Help/FAQs" tabs on the left side of the Registry home page, as well as in the "NGC Registry Help and Instructions" section of this forum.

Although "PGS" is a "basement slabber" and not a reputable grading service, the well-worn 1902 Barber dime in the holder isn't necessarily misdescribed as "G-4" and "scratched", and I don't think the dealer did anything wrong by putting it in a grab bag sold for $4.50, especially if the bag contained additional coins. From what I can see, the coin is genuine. (Coin World currently lists a 1902 Barber dime at $5.50 in G 4.) The dealer was wrong to call "PGS" (not to be confused with PCGS) a "top three grading service". Unfortunately, there are many (usually low-end) coins in these "off-brand" holders, which end up (often after being sold by the original submitter or purchaser) in the inventories of smaller dealers. As long as they sell the coins for reasonable prices based on a reasonable appraisal of the coin in the holder and not necessarily what is printed on the label, I see nothing wrong with this. Their only alternative with coins like the one posted would be to crack them of the holders and put them in stapled 2x2s or flips, in this case with the same grade and sell them for the same price. For the record, the "top tier" grading services are NGC (Numismatic Guaranty Company, formerly Corporation), PCGS (Professional Coin Grading Service), and presumably the new CAC (Certified Acceptance Corporation) grading service. The "second tier" but nevertheless reputable services are ANACS (not an acronym since the early 1990s, when it was sold by the American Numismatic Association) and ICG (Independent Coin Graders). ANACS is respected for certifying lesser known but legitimate die varieties that the top tier services don't and for offering a lower-priced alternative to the top tier services for two and three figure collector coins. ICG gets mixed reviews. All collectors should develop grading skills to evaluate coins for themselves, whether or not certified by any service. There are a few now defunct services that were respected in their time, including Hallmark and PCI (holders with green or red trimmed labels only). PCI was ultimately sold to a dealer who used its equipment mostly to slab his own inventory, which was mostly overgraded. I understand that these later PCI holders have brown or gold trimmed labels and should be avoided. SEGS (formerly operated by Larry Briggs, a legitimate dealer and varieties attributor) has a mixed reputation but shouldn't be regarded as a "basement slabber" either.

In the new photos, the coin definitely looks polished and likely removed from jewelry. It may or may not be genuine. I don't think that you have to worry about its value exceeding the tier maximum.

The seller in the link is purporting to offer a 1943-P, 3 over 2 and claiming that this overdate variety is identified by a "hook on point of 3." I've never heard this before and believe it to be (putting it diplomatically) incorrect. NGC identifies the diagnostic for the 1943, 3 over 2 as, "[r]emains of a 2 are seen inside the 3 of the date. Doubling is seen on LIBERTY and IN GOD WE TRUST." See Jefferson Five Cents (1938-Date) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). Additionally, I understand that both the curved and horizontal parts of the "2" must be visible within the "3" to attribute it as a "3 over 2". (The overdate has been confused with a die break that creates a horizontal line under the "2". As noted, the posted coin is a 1943-D, which is not known as an overdate or, to my knowledge, a "hooked 3" variety (not error).

Submit the coin in the "Gold" tier ($35 grading fee). It is extremely unlikely that the coin would achieve a grade that it would be worth more than the $3,000 maximum for that tier. Based on the photos in your previous topic, it will most likely receive a grade in the low mint state range, or possibly be "Details" graded as "cleaned" or "polished", with retail values in the $500 to $1300 range. If it were to receive a grade at which it would be valued significantly higher than the $3,000 maximum, NGC would charge you the difference for the appropriate tier. It's unfortunate if you're submitting only this one coin, as you will also have to pay processing and return shipping fees totaling $38 that could have been spread over a larger order. If you have other coins valued between $300 and $3,000 that you want to submit, you can spread these fees out over the order, using the "Standard" ($40) tier if some of them are non-gold. Another option would be to submit the coin through an NGC member dealer, who might be able to submit at a lower cost.

See the linked page, which indicates that such an impaired coin would be graded "Uncirculated Details".

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I assume that by this you mean, "Is it worth submitting to a third-party grading service?" Grading is generally a skill a collector should himself acquire before considering submitting coins to third-party grading services. In this case, the primary reason to consider so submitting the coin is for an error attribution, not a grade. However, submitting this coin to NGC would involve a $19 grading fee (Modern tier) as well as an $18 error attribution fee, and if you are submitting just this one coin, the entire $10 per order processing fee and $28 return shipping fee, totaling $75, not including your own shipping costs. (I'm assuming that you already have a paid NGC membership.) Submission through an NGC member dealer might save you something, as well as submitting the coin to ANACS instead of NGC, but the cost would still be considerable. Unless this damaged die error has an established market value well in excess of the cost of submission, it really isn't worth submitting. If you want to keep it, I recommend placing it in a proper holder such as a hard plastic capsule or "Snap-Tite" or a mylar flip with your own attribution. If you want to sell it, you might want to see what dealers who specialize in errors (such as Sullivan Numismatics) will pay for it and let them assume the cost of any desired third-party grading and attribution.

Volume II of the sixth edition of the Cherrypickers' Guide, covering half dime through quarter dollar varieties, came out last fall and is currently being offered by Whitman (whitman.com). Volume I is sold out, and I do not know whether it will be reprinted. A third volume covering the remaining series is planned, but I do not know when it is to be published. I wish I had more information to provide.