Sandon

Evidently, when I checked this coin in the "Redbook" over a year ago, I mistakenly looked at the mintage for the quarter ounce, $25 denomination coin, which is reported as 2,481 pieces. The 2,253 piece figure is reported for the half ounce, $50 denomination.

@Pelicanpusher--For custom sets, you create your own slots. Open your custom set while logged in, click the "Edit Set" tab, then click the "Add From Inventory" button if your 1861-O half dollar has already been entered into your inventory (a.k.a. "My Competitive Coins") through the "Add Coin" function; or click the "Add New" button if it hasn't. You can place the slot for this coin anywhere you want it by changing the numbers in the "Slot Order" column. You can name the slot as you wish if the item description in the system isn't sufficient. How the issuing authority (U.S., Louisiana, or C.S.A.) of specific varieties of 1861-O Liberty Seated half dollars has been "determined" and whether it is correct or even knowable would be an interesting topic for the "U.S., World, and Ancient Coins" forum. As I understand it, the varieties were assigned issuers by Messrs. Wiley and Bugert, the authors of The Complete Guide to Liberty Seated Half Dollars. Their methodology is unclear. The only variety whose issuer (the Confederacy) I think would be safe to assume would be the WB-102 or FS-407 variety, whose obverse die, showing a die crack from the bridge of Liberty's nose to the denticles, was also used for the four known original 1861 half dollars with the Confederate reverse. See Seated Liberty Half Dollars (1839-1891) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com).

Actually, it is unlikely that a third-party grading service would attribute a previously unlisted die variety, unless it were a very significant one, which I don't think this is. NGC generally does not attribute die varieties that aren't listed on VarietyPlus, which excludes many lesser varieties on post-1836 U.S. coins, including the purported Mount Rushmore ("South Dakota") and Denali doubled dies to which the OP provided links (to his own website, without attribution references). See What is a Variety? | NGC (ngccoin.com), America the Beautiful Quarters | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). This coin could be submitted to CONECA for possible attribution. https://conecaonline.org/attribution-services/. If CONECA agrees that it is a DDR or other die variety, it will be assigned a number and might be attributable by ANACS, which I understand will generally attribute listed varieties.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I don't think that your 1971 quarter exhibits a doubled die reverse. The image below the branch, though interesting, is too shallow and localized. I also note shallow, shelf-like doubling on some of the lettering, which is likely either strike doubling or doubling that originated in the master hub that was used to make some 1971 quarter reverse dies. It doesn't match any variety listed on NGC VarietyPlus, doubleddie.com, or Variety Vista. See Washington Quarters (1932-1998) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com), https://www.doubleddie.com/2019558.html, http://www.varietyvista.com/09b WQ Vol 2/DDRs 1971.htm for known varieties. See also Double Dies vs. Machine Doubling | NGC (ngccoin.com).

The 1942-D was not made in the wartime composition (35% silver), only in the regular copper nickel alloy. (Check your "Redbook".) It's considered a somewhat better date but should be available from coin dealers.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Although NGC does not give free advice, other members of the forum may be able to help you. EDIT: If, as you stated (and I didn't notice originally), your coin has no "D" mintmark, it has no collector value and should not be submitted. The only 1982 dated cent that is valuable is a 1982-D small date composed of brass (95% copper), with a weight of approximately 3.11 grams. If your coin is not a 1982-D small date or if it weighs approximately 2.5 grams (copper plated zinc), it is a variety with a mintage of hundreds of millions or billions of pieces, an example found in circulation would only be worth face value, and you would waste money (likely $100 or more) submitting it to a third-party grading service such as NGC. Frankly, your odds of finding a 1982-D small date "copper" cent are extremely remote, as very few are known to exist. If your coin has a "D" mintmark below the date, you have verified that it is a small date and weighs at least 2.98 grams (the lowest legal weight for the brass composition) on a properly calibrated, good quality digital scale, you may post clear, cropped photos of each side of it on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum for review by other forum members. FYI, here is an "infographic" courtesy of one of our members, @EagleRJO, that should help you verify that your coin is a small date and has a "D" mintmark.

It's amazing how many people claim that they have examples of so-called 1964 "SMS" or "Special Strike" coins. We've seen two other such claims in the last two weeks. The first claimant had a 1964 proof set that had been abrasively cleaned. fun show how to get my sms 1964’ graded without mailing - Coin Marketplace - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards. The second couldn't post clear photos but apparently had a perfectly normal 1964 half dollar. https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/432403-1964-sms-jfk/. The reasons for these coins likely not existing outside of the currently known examples were explained in the replies to these topics. There have been a number of other such claims on these forums over the years, none of which has ever been substantiated. The current claimant has shown photos only of the reverse of his coin, but it appears to have normal frosty luster, not the satin finish and numerous die polish marks that are characteristic of the so-called "SMS" coins. It should be noted that this member (the OP) has previously claimed to have an 1870-S Liberty Seated dollar and a 1927-D double eagle, even though neither coin had a legible mint mark!

Welcome to the NGC chat board. I agree that this copper plated zinc Lincoln cent, which I think is actually a 1988-D, is severely damaged and corroded and does not exhibit any mint error. I have seen many such damaged coins. For examples of coins with multiple strikes, see https://www.error-ref.com/?s=multiple+strike and the portion of Learn Grading: What Is a Mint Error? — Part 2 | NGC (ngccoin.com) dealing with "Double-, Triple- and Multi-Struck Coins". For examples of previously struck coins that were overstruck with dies of coins of different denominations or designs or from different years, see the examples shown at https://www.error-ref.com/?s=double+denomination. Submitting this coin to a grading service would be a waste of money. If you are a new collector, we can advise you as to reliable print and online resources from which you can learn how to more accurately identify and evaluate coins. All you need do is to ask.

I have never obtained bank rolls just to look for coins but have obtained some current year coins from pieces received in change over the years, going back to the mid 1970s. When a cashier hands you a coin just taken from a roll of new coins, it is still in "uncirculated" condition. (One of the things you must learn is how to distinguish between an uncirculated coin and an "AU" that exhibits high point wear.) It is important to place such a coin in your wallet, not your pocket, rinse it off with cool tap water when you get home, pat (don't rub) it dry with a clean tissue, and after a period of further air drying put it in proper storage, such as in a coin album or a plastic holder or tube. Try to select pieces with minimal abrasions and good strikes, which may be difficult to find because nowadays coins are packed into and transported in large plastic bags containing thousands of pieces before being rolled. Depending on your location, the "new" coins you find, even from rolls, will be predominantly from one mint or the other, and you may be unable to find decent examples of many issues. You will have to buy at least some from coin dealers or obtain mint sets.

Proof 1859 Liberty Seated quarter, PCGS graded PR 63, ex-Teich Family Collection: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Your 1979-D quarter is worn, scratched and has many contact marks, which affect its evaluation. I have seen many quarters from this era with the motto and/or mint mark looking like this. Either or both circumstances could have resulted from worn dies, foreign matter on the die, and/or the wear and tear on the coin. Although the first two causes would have originated at the mint, these would be regarded as quality control issues, not mint errors, and do not give the coin any collector value.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. As I understand it, you can add "NGC Ancients" coins to your inventory ("My Competitive Coins") on the registry through the "Add Coin" function appearing as a green plus sign ("+") at the right upper hand corner of any registry page, such as NGC Registry | Online Coin Registry Set Collecting | NGC (ngccoin.com). That page also has links to various instructions and information concerning the registry. There are no "competitive sets" for ancient coins due to the enormous number of different ancient coins, but you can create a "custom set" that contains them in accordance with your own preferences. See NGC Registry | Custom Sets (collectors-society.com).

1853 quarter eagle with repunched date, PCGS graded AU 53: Photos courtesy of Stacks Bowers Galleries.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Coins with flattened, raised edges like yours are often referred to as "dryer coins" because such damage can occur by a coin being caught in the outer tub of a clothes dryer. See 1969 half dollar and 1964 nickel errors? - Newbie Coin Collecting Questions - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards and Dryer Coins Explained With Image Gallery, Many Pictured, Some Extreme - Coin Community Forum. This type of damage can also occur from a coin being deliberately beaten on the edge, which is also called being "spooned". See Spooned Coins - Newbie Coin Collecting Questions - NGC Coin Collectors Chat Boards. In either case, this is post-mint damage, not a mint error.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Sorry, but I highly doubt that your 1919-S Lincoln cent was "struck [o]n another blank". The coin is heavily worn, with Good or so details. Assuming that your scale is accurate, some of the low weight is likely due to wear. The difference in the condition of the two sides and the weak obverse lettering suggests that the planchet (blank) was cut from thinner than normal stock, which is fairly common and worth little or no premium, especially for a coin this worn. The coin is of a normal color for a circulated bronze cent and appears to be of the correct diameter. To support your hypothesis, you would have to identify a blank that could have been present at the San Francisco mint in 1919 that would be composed of a largely copper alloy, would have the same color and approximately the same diameter as a U.S. small cent (19 mm), and would have a weight of approximately 2.6 grams. I note that that mint coined 1919-S Philippines centavos (bronze) and five centavos (copper-nickel), but the one centavo pieces had a diameter of 24 mm and a weight of 4.7 grams, while the 5 centavos had a diameter of 20.5 mm (per the "Redbook") or 21.3 mm (per the NGC World Coin Price Guide), a weight of 5.25 grams, and a distinctly different color. See 2023 Redbook at p.435, Philippines Centavo KM 163 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com), Philippines 5 Centavos KM 164 Prices & Values | NGC (ngccoin.com). You should research whatever other coins would have been struck at that mint during that era. I have now collected and studied U.S. coins for nearly 53 years. I have never owned a scale or a micrometer (caliper), which I acknowledge may be useful for the detection of some counterfeits. You can learn a lot more about U.S. coins by looking at them and reading respected references about them than you can from such instruments. You should be able recognize a mint error or die variety that would attract the attention of a significant number of collectors by looking at it with the unaided eye or at low (5-10x) magnification.

The three-piece bicentennial silver proof sets, of which the mint sold nearly four million units, are generally very high quality, unlike the uncirculated sets. In addition to having one of the sets that I bought from the mint at the time of issue, I own examples of the quarter and half dollar graded PR 69 DCAM by PCGS that I bought in November 2021 to fill registry set slots for all of $16 and $15 respectively. As shown by the photos below, these coins are virtually flawless. Examples graded "70" are not readily distinguishable, even by experienced graders. Some of the information provided by @Rob75B11 is incomplete or obsolete, as the "Modern tier" grading fee at NGC applicable to these coins is presently $19 per coin, and your order would also require payment of a $10 processing fee and a $28 return shipping fee, as well as your own cost of shipping the coins to NGC. See NGC Services and Fees | NGC (ngccoin.com). PCGS fees are similar. The submission of common, modern coins like these to grading services is usually a waste of money.

Most numismatic authorities do not believe that high levels of magnification should be used to examine coins, except for some authentication purposes. To be truly appreciated, each full side of a coin must be viewed as a whole. Otherwise, one can't see the forest for the trees! "With few exceptions, NGC will not attribute die varieties that require greater than 5x magnification to be clearly recognizable." What is a Variety? | NGC (ngccoin.com). Similarly, the recently published Volume 2, Sixth Edition of the Cherrypickers Guide to Rare Die Varieties states as a "helpful hint" at p. 27, "If you can't discern a variety with a 7x loupe, it probably isn't significant enough to earn the attention of other collectors." I like to look at coins at 10x myself and occasionally check details at 15x but have never found anything stronger to be necessary. We're looking at coins, after all, not microorganisms! I use a digital microscope, usually propped up on a stack of books, to photograph entire sides of coins. I find a loupe much better to look at details, including the identification of die varieties.

I think that the ghostly, raised areas on the reverse of this 1973-D Lincoln cent are most likely a phenomenon seen on coins struck from worn dies known as "progressive indirect die transfer". See https://www.error-ref.com/?s=progressive+transfer, which describes this phenomenon, using the acronym "PIDT" as follows: "The cause of PIDT is straightforward. When the hammer die (obverse die) strikes the planchet, the force of the strike is transferred into and through the planchet and onto the opposing die (reverse or anvil die). Since the dies are slightly convex, the strongest force felt on the planchet is in the center of that planchet. However, in the case of the Lincoln cent, the center of the obverse die is incuse, so the area on the obverse die that experiences the first and strongest force is the field area immediately adjacent to Lincoln’s bust. Each strike transmits part of the force onto the opposing die. The area that transfers the most force onto the reverse die is the outline of Lincoln’s bust. This transferred force produces uneven metal flow in the reverse die, gradually creating a “ghost” image of Lincoln. "Since coins that are in a Late Die State (LDS) develop this trait, it is considered a form of die deterioration." The bulge within the Lincoln Memorial on the 1973-D cent appears to be the outline of Lincoln's bust from the other side of the coin. The photos shown on the linked error-ref.com page show coins with similar, reversed ghost-like images of the outlines of the design from the other side of the coin.

It wouldn't have to be MS 65 or any mint state grade, but it would have to have sufficient detail to identify the variety clearly. The coin that is the subject of this topic is worn down to barely Fine condition and has some surface damage. It is not possible to tell for sure whether it was struck from a doubled die with a narrow "spread" between the images and, accordingly, can't be attributed as such. If you really can't see the doubling that makes it interesting, why does it matter anyway?

I don't think that this coin was broadstruck or any other mint error. Your 1958-D Lincoln cent was very likely at one time encased in a metal ring and used as a souvenir or as advertising for some event or product. Coins removed from such rings exhibit this type of flattening and/or crimping around the edges. See the following topic for examples of encased cents and the damage that shows on coins removed from the encasements:

PCGS states that the so-called "SMS" or "special strike" coins "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." Your photos are too blurry and uncropped to show die polishing lines or an absence of contact mark, but they do show a reflectivity of luster that is inconsistent with a "smooth satin like appearance". As noted, the photos are also too blurry to show any "die markers" such as the defect on the crosslet of the "4" said to be present on all but one of the authenticated pieces. The photos seem to show an ordinary 1964 Kennedy half dollar with some tarnish type toning and possible light wear. Here are cropped photos of an uncirculated 1964 Kennedy half dollar that has spent decades in a coin album. My photography isn't great either, but based on what I've seen so far, if your coin is one of the special strikes, maybe this one is as well.

Welcome to the NGC chat board. Obviously, we couldn't offer any opinion whatsoever as to the nature of your coin without seeing clear, cropped photos of each side of your coin. So far, you have offered no evidence that you have one of the extremely rare and controversial so-called "SMS" 1964 Kennedy half dollars. As you probably know, the Philadelphia mint produced over 273 million circulation quality Kennedy half dollars, which were generally well struck, have sharp rims and are frosty when uncirculated. The mint also sold over 3.9 million proof sets containing well struck, mirror surface proof versions of this coin. The so-called "SMS" pieces are said to have a "uniformly satin finish" (NGC), which you don't mention. See photos and discussion at https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1964-50c-sms/6844 and Kennedy Half Dollars (1964-Date) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com) (1964 50C SP). As mentioned by @Coinbuf, these coins are believed to have a special provenance originating with former mint director Eva Adams or another mint employee and not to exist "in the wild". We frequently see claims of findings of 1964 SMS coins and other extremely rare special or off-metal strikings on these forums, but so far none of these claims has ever been proven. We have good reason to be skeptical. Many of the unidentified "websites and videos" you have seen may contain disinformation, as has unfortunately become all too common.

Both of these coins, which were struck 28 years apart, are within the normal range of variation in appearance for copper-nickel clad coins found in circulation. Both the texture of the surfaces and apparent thickness of the coins when viewed at the edge may be affected by variations in the condition of the dies that impart the designs to the coins and the grooved collars that create the reeded edge, by planchet quality, and by conditions experienced by each coin after being placed into circulation. The 2002-P dime appears to have significantly more wear on the edge than the 1984-P, whose edge still has some original copper color and may appear somewhat thicker for that reason. The 2002-P dime was well struck as well as being approximately the correct weight, essentially negating the possibility that it was struck on an unusually thin planchet. If you believe that a coin may have collector value, you should not touch its surfaces with bare skin, which may result in wear and impart oils that may cause discoloration. Hold a coin, if you must, only by its edge.

After viewing your photos under maximum magnification, your 1972-D Lincoln cent does appear to be a minor doubled die variety. The secondary images on the motto and "LIBERTY" appear to be crisp and raised in some areas, and there is some "notching" between the images. I'm not sure that it is the same variety as the WDDO-002 variety on doubleddie.com, which I think is also the same variety shown on NGC VarietyPlus as VP-002. See Lincoln Cents, Memorial Reverse (1959-2008) | VarietyPlus® | NGC (ngccoin.com). It is at least similar.

Assuming that the photos are in one of the listed permitted formats, check their size and if they exceed the 4.88 MB maximum size, check if your photo software for a "resize" function to reduce them to a permitted size. Please note, however, that the NGC Registry forum is for topics respecting the Registry, and this topic would be better posted on the "Newbie Coin Collecting Questions" forum.