physics-fan3.14

So we are delaying the one that would have been at FUN 2025?

Any update on this issue? 

Or, any update on a decision to accept CAC Graded coins into the Registry? 

I don't own any yet, but I'm looking at a couple. 

On 5/20/2023 at 6:36 AM, Coinzrfun said:

 

I submitted them through a dealer. So to be safe let's say they have them by June 1 should I expect them back in 4 to 5 weeks? 20-25 working days?

No. I recently (Feb-March) submitted a world coins order, and it took 2-3 months to get them back (early May). 

On 5/20/2023 at 12:59 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Has the turnaround time for coin submissions eased since 2 years ago ?

No. It has actually gotten longer... increased demand for world coins means longer times. NGC has posted job positions for anyone interested, but the demand for coins graded seems to have outstripped qualified graders. Turnaround times are now in the 2-3 month range for world coins. 

On 5/20/2023 at 12:58 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Any reason you require a professional imager ?  You can't do it yourself with a nice camera/smartphone and tripod ?

What kind of price does a professional imager charge ?

The difference between a good smartphone used well, and an actual camera with a proper lens and lighting..... Its like the difference between a Walmart steak and the nicest steak you've ever eaten. They just can't compare. 

Some imagers don't charge much... they enjoy taking pictures, and enjoy seeing the coins, and that's how they enjoy the hobby. The best photog I've used charged $10 per coin, plus shipping. 

For me personally, I've invested a few hundred bucks into my photography setup and I take really good pictures of most of my coins. This has helped me win "Best Presented" Sets in the NGC Registry 3 times. I'm proud of my pictures... and I take them to share on the forums, Registry, etc. 

However... I can't compare with the pros. 

@leeg I don't know who you've sent your coins to. I'll say that Robec (Bob Campbell) is very, very good. I've sent him quite a lot of coins in the past, before I built my own setup. I'll say that Sir Messy is also exceptional. I've sent him some of my very difficult coins... well worth the modest price he charges. If you don't buy his calendar each year, what are you doing? 

I will also add... there are some "professional" photographers that charge a fee and I've been incredibly disappointed with their pictures. I'd absolutely avoid Todd, aka BlueCC. Great guy, very friendly... he just didn't do a good job with the coins I sent him. 

This thread would probably see more results if you posted in the US coins forum - you have this listed in the marketplace. 

As for the coins... that 1956 is an incredibly harshly polished business strike coin. 

The 1952 shown in an earlier post is most likely a business strike coin which has been polished and possibly plated after it left the mint. 

Both of these coins are damaged... there is no secret, unknown die state shown on these coins. 

And, a VEDS (as you call it) is not an "undefined subtype" with unicorn characteristics. Its just an early die state. These are well understood, and graded appropriately. 

On 5/7/2023 at 8:32 AM, Simple Collector said:

The coin shown was recently graded by a gentleman I know which has both the + and *!

Wow! That is gorgeous! 

I love rainbow toned bust halves. Big fan. 

On 5/4/2023 at 6:20 PM, USAuPzlBxBob said:

Well, on the only thread I've found from BillJones — The Wells Fargo Hoard — I came across Condor101 who is 13 Veteran.

In looking through that thread to see when was the last time BillJones replied, I came across the most number of 14 Grand Master level Boards Title:

James_OldeTowne
RWB
physics-fan3.14 (who has a dual title Grand Master and WYNK Black Belt)
gmarguli (also a dual title:  Grand Master and Slightly Evil)
MarkFeld (dual title:  Grand Master and Dealer)
WoodenJefferson (dual title:  Grand Master and I have nothing to add or subtract, I am merely here.
 

Yes, many years ago "Architect" granted a few of us custom titles. I don't believe the Architect is still involved here, but the custom titles stuck. 

I used to! I assembled a collection by monarch, as you did. I have since sold that collection and moved in a different direction. 

This was one of my favorites: 

That is a cast reproduction of an Athenian owl. It is not a genuine coin. 

Roger - FMtM and Renaissance trilogy are your best book covers. Simple, evocative, title is bold.... I don't care for extraneous imagery. 

In that vein, I like the Eagle and Lion cover better. Just make sure the imagery conveys the message of your book. 

On 3/26/2023 at 10:16 AM, cladking said:

The cross on the "Q" looks shorter and less curved on the type 2.  The right side of the "N" in "UNUM" is much farther away from the eagle's head.  

Most of the lettering is thinner and the relief is much lower.  If this could be explained by the life of a single die I'd certainly agree but there are numerous dies. Each "type 2"  appears to have gone into production in about the same condition and there are no hybrids as you'd expect if die polishing were the explanation.   

 

Most of the differences were still subtle even by 1984 but the lower relief is hardly subtle.  The '77 and '78 lower relief was more more subtle.  It was '79 before the relief dropped in earnest. 

Ok, I can accept claims of differences in position and shape of lettering. None of this has been mentioned by OP, or anywhere in this thread until now. OP shows no pictures of Q, and has different lighting on Unum. If we can get clear and identically lit pictures that show these differences, we'll make progress. 

On 3/27/2023 at 4:30 PM, RWB said:

How about providing some empirical measurements from a surface profilometer -- similar to the images I posted about a year ago.

If the claimants have access to modern photographical suits, an overlay would be another great tool to clearly show differences. The pictures must be shot from the same angle, same magnification, and same lighting to be useful. But modern photo suites should have a way to overlay images to clearly show differences. 

On 3/27/2023 at 5:20 PM, nccc said:

Die Deterioration/Wear:

Why is this the go-to explanation? The logic I’m hearing is this:

There is die deterioration/wear, therefore this coin cannot have doubling.

The fact is all business strike quarters I've seen - including ones in Unc Mint Sets - have die deterioration/wear.

Die deterioration/wear does not preclude or exclude a coin from having doubling.
 

I agree - die wear does not preclude doubling. But, most of what you have shown can be more easily described by die wear instead of new types. Occam's Razor. 

On 3/27/2023 at 5:22 PM, nccc said:

J P M:

I think the industry term that I’ve seen is “notching” and the diagnostic is called a “notch” and some notches are double serifs while others are not. My ‘double peak’ is a notch but it is not a double serif.

 

The "double peak" on the A can just as easily be explained by die deterioration that has advanced to the state where it also has radial "starburst" grooves. The coin you show is clearly a very late die state, and starburst die grooves are common on many of the images you show. Your "notch" may in fact not be a notch at all.

On 3/27/2023 at 5:45 PM, nccc said:

physics-fan:

Do you truly think the doubling on the "Type 2 over Type 1" DDR is just hubbing pressure or die wear? Die wear is jagged & random. It does not form straight, sharply defined, or crisp lines that form into a doubled outline of a letter.

Can you or someone show me die wear that looks like this:


Look how crisp the lines are on the thinner “P” on top of the thicker one.

And on the 'R' in AMERICA, the doubled outline follows exactly the outline of the legs of the 'R'. What is die wear are the striations below the legs.


Look at how much distance there is in the gap between the thin and the thick/doubled outline of the legs (which is clearly defined). Did hubbing pressure or die wear really cause that? If so, why the wide gap in the doubling?

Just google die deterioration doubling. It has exactly the appearance that you show. Different coin, different era... but this 1999P Jefferson shows something extremely similar. 

On 3/25/2023 at 4:03 PM, cladking said:

I'm not convinced yet the the DDR is legitimate but I've long believed that the difference between the type 1 and type 2 is.   They appear to be two distinct designs.  

One thing that makes the type 2 over type 1 believable to me is that it appears the type 2 (single squeeze design) was lightly imparted so all the PUP's appear more doubled.   Perhaps the technician saw the light design and mistakenly assumed it must be the type 1 so squeezed another time.  I'll reserve judgment on this coin for expert opinion or seeing it in hand.   

I'm just not seeing anything between the two so-called types that can't be explained by hubbing pressure and die wear. There is no variation in the shape of letters, distances between them, or any distinct variation. Yes, one is thicker - but more pressure on the hub will do that, and then a much later die state will also lead to thicker elements (as shown on the pictures in the OP).

And, the single squeeze process wasn't even starting to be developed until 1985. It didn't receive widespread use until the mid-90s. The OP is claiming this is a 1983D (although, he must be confused because he's labeled a proof coin as 83D as well). 

On 3/25/2023 at 1:57 PM, Zebo said:

Maybe a nice Charlotte mint piece instead?

Not really much cheaper, haha. 

As a Carolina Boy, I've always wanted one of the Bechtler pieces. Availability, priority, and budget have just never aligned. 

I'm familiar with the one cent (although I don't own one). I didn't realize he struck other denominations. 

What I'm seeing on the Type I vs Type 2 can all be explained by regular die wear, from a late die state. 

And, while I agree that the so-called DDR looks weird... it looks a lot like "die deterioration doubling".... again, from a late die state. 

If you want recognition on this one, it will have to be submitted to several of the leading variety attributers. You should start with CONECA. Instructions can be found here: https://conecaonline.org/attribution-services/

If Mike Ellis agrees that you've got something good, then you've got something good. 

It's not unheard of to find new varieties - I myself am listed as discoverer for a Franklin DDR. 

On 3/20/2023 at 3:57 PM, Ali E. said:

Hello, and congratulations!

We appreciate your support of the NGC Registry. We currently have an extensive backlog of requests for new slots and sets for coins and notes that have zero representation in the NGC or PMG Registry. We are focusing our limited resources on those requests. You may create a Custom NGC Registry set if you wish to display all your coins separately. Thanks very much.

I fully understand you have a backlog, no worries. I'm just hoping you consider adding it to the list

And yes, I have a Custom Set that I'm overhauling this year. 

Thanks

Hi, Ali! 

I'd like to request a new set for Morocco: Coins of the French Protectorate. 

In Krause, it is numbers Y# 34.1 through Y# 54 (dates 1921 - 1956). This a cool set, with lots of variety. We currently have a type set for the era (and, I won Best Presented Set this year), but I'd like to see the full set. 

We've slowly been expanding the Morocco sets in the Registry, so I'd love to see this added. Thanks