EagleRJO

Thats to funny that you were directed back to yourself for answers, but at least it was correct as to where to find the best answers. I have a feeling that davidprince doesn't realize how easy it is for potential victims to find out he is a clueless fraud and numismatic scam artist by continuing to post his misinformation and variety garbage here.

Did you expect anything else since he is getting continuously slammed and ignored on this forum for his misinformation and very shady Etsy/eBay raw coin flipping with counterfeits and misattributed varieties that is ripping off less knowledgeable collectors. But he apparently thinks he might be able to recover his reputation or people might actually pay attention to his posts which is just not going to happen and is totally beyond repair. It seems like he thought people here would not be able to recognize a clueless fraud and numismatic scam artist, and I don't understand why he is even continuing with posts which are just being ignored or slammed. The more davidprince is called out on this forum for being a fraud and scam artist the more likely less knowledgeable collectors will be able to find that from a search and avoid being ripped off on eBay. But davidprince seems to be oblivious to that and it was only a matter of time before the frustration at not being able to hoodwing people here and resulting damage to davidprince's FleaBay flipping ended up with some backlash.

This is going to be a little lengthy post, but I think it's important considering what you think you are seeing on these coins. It seems like using the scope combined with the shaky pictures and type of lighting is just sending you down rabbit hole after rabbit hole. When you have that level of magnification you tend to see things on a coin which are simply not important or misleading, and just the lighting or a coin being slightly out of focus with that magnification will fool you into seeing things which just are not there, like the doubling you thought you saw on the 1982-D and 1955-S cents. Knowledgeable collectors only use that level of magnification at 50x for very specific purposes like counterfeit detection, variety attribution, and numeric grade limiting issues. So I think you need to start over from scratch and just use a 10x loupe or magnifying glass and hold the coin in your hand by the edges with good lighting and examine the coin as you turn it. This method is very useful for finding true doubling since you can see the height of that, and other things like looking for luster. Many collectors, including myself, use a 10x loupe or magnifying glass, which can have built-in lighting to examine coins. I prefer a self-supporting 10x mag glass with built-in LED lights because when examining larger old dollar coins I can still see a view of the entire coin. Plus, I can also set that up on a table where I can quickly examine coins when roll hunting. But I may be partial to using a mag glass as I remember when I was a kid going through old style glass milk jugs full of pocket change with my grandfather at his kitchen table using a beat up old style magnifying glass, Use what works for you, but I would put away the scope for now and try examining coins with a lower level of magnification at 5x or 10x. Plus when you do find errors or varieties collectors generally want to be able to see that without a high level of magnification, or more often no magnification at all. Also, the following link to an article on tools for coin collectors, including what level of magnification to use, may be helpful to you. https://www.pcgs.com/news/tools-of-a-professional-coin-grader

No I don't need and didn't ask for die variety information since I clearly requested other labeled diagrams of coins. Please stop trying to indirectly plug your Etsy/eBay shady raw coin variety flipping.with counterfeits and misattributed coins by posting variety links to give the appearance you know what you are doing when you don't.

NGC VarietyPlus includes the following diagnostics: "Minor doubling is visible in all obverse lettering and the date" and also shows pictures for doubling of "In God We" and "Liberty" on the obverse.which does not appear to be present, So I don't think we need to see the reverse to make a call on this one, although that should have been posted in any event for a complete review.

I think he needs to put the bag of cents down and slowly step away from the table, and keep those hands in plain sight so we know you didn't grab some more cents to look at.

There is some disagreement on that, and @RWB and others may basically be technically correct that it is "cotton bols" [which is also how it is referred to in the ANA Grading Standards]. But the term "cotton blossoms" for Morgans is one that is still generally accepted and used by the TPG's as well as on reputable sites like VAM World.

So that is how you react to honest comments about advice being completely ignored. And if someone completely ignored your advice, and ended up being completely wrong again because they ignored that advice, you wouldn't get frustrated or react to being completely ignored and comment on that? Yea sure, keep telling yourself that. Another one for the "ignore list".so you wont be getting any further help from me, and likely others too. And very derogatory remarks concerning Hitler are not called for and have been reported to the forum @Administrator [and subsequently scrubbed] Or they could go to this big building with a lot of books in it called a "library" which usually has or can get copies of those basic books to borrow.

It looks like AT (Artificial Toning) on that 1918-S Cent, as well as the two coins in hand, to me also as I don't see good color progression. That's what counts even if it is AT of the coins in-hand which all seem to lack good color progression, but just so you are aware some collectors consider AT in a very bad light as something intended to fool less knowledgeable collectors.. And talking about coins in-hand. if you are going to use your bare hands to handle coins only touch them at the edges as your hand has oils at the surface which could negatively affect the coins. Some collectors, including me, soak all their better raw coins in acetone before putting them in long-term storage holders to ensure there are no oily fingerprints on the coins.

Use the following Infographic to determine if you see hub doubling with the coin in-hand, but I don't see any doubling in the photo.

PCG$ initially labeled the "Black Beauty" nickels as "Sintered Planchet", then "Improperly Annealed/SIntered". But then finally changed it to the more technically correct term "Improperly Annealed Planchet" quite a while ago which NGC was already using. However, both of these TPGs have been using "improper annealing" for a while as evidenced by the slab ages and consistent with current thinking as previously noted. Strangely, it looks like older ANACS slabs initially labeled the "Black Beauty" nickels as first "Improper Alloy Mix", then "Improperly Annealed Planchet" and apparently then inexplicably changed the labels back to "Improper Alloy Mix" more recently.

Looks like the coin in the 2nd slab on the right in my previous post was centered properly when it was graded per the attached from the NGC certification verification page, and it's not known how it was subsequently handled. But you are right they misspelled "Gold" which is pretty bad, and there is no excuse for that. If that was my coin I would have sent it back for a correction due to a mechanical label error, and maybe that subsequently happened. Heritage Auctions is likely a good option with a good reputation and considering the unusual nature as well as the possible scarcity of the medal. But just keep in mind there is usually a fee for photographing the coin, a 5% to 15% non-refundable sellers fee each time it is listed in an auction, and a 15% buyers fee if it sells. So a seller could end up with a lot less than they expect, and I would talk with them about what they think it might sell for before consigning it with them. I don't have any experience with Künker Auction House but perhaps someone here like @Fenntucky Mike, @ldhair, or @Coinbuf or others have some experience with them and might give you some feedback. But I would expect their fees would likely be similar to HA's, and I think it's a well known European auction house. Good luck with the coins you are going to auction off, and check back after the auction.

Wasn't intended as a slam the newbie post, and this is the newbie sub-forum, but honest questions or comments about previous advice already given to you. It does get frustrating when it seems previous advice given is completely ignored.

I found the attached labeled "Anatomy of the Morgan Dollar" on VAM World which was useful in understanding VAM descriptions, locating markers or understanding grading terms. Kind of like one-stop-shopping for understanding what elements on a particular coin were called in case you forgot. So I was curious if anyone has come across something similar for any other coins, particularly for some of the older half dollars and quarters.

Where do you see doubling that may be a match with a 1972 (P) 1C FS-104 DDO, or any hub doubling for that matter?

These are my comments from another one of your earlier posts ... Ebay and YT (except vids from like ANA, NGC or PCGS) are horrible places to learn about coins as evidenced by the coins posted so far and descriptions. I recommend you start over from scratch beginning with the following topics, and also spend some time on Error-Ref.com if you are interested in error coins and then post more coins with questions. https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/428817-resources-for-new-collectors/ https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/430263-basic-resources-glossary/ So what did you find on Error-Ref.com which might indicate this could be a mint error?

I understand that both NGC and PCG$ have taken that position, and label the slabs for darkened or "Black Beauty" nickels as an "Improperly Annealed" mint error, consistent with what you are saying, and current thinking for this error. ANACS is the one flip-flopping between "Improper Alloy Mix" (see above) and "Improperly Annealed Planchet" so I don't know what the label for this error is this week. However, I have read unconfirmed rumours that it may have been caused by small amounts of cobalt or silicone left over in the refining process from two distinct nickel ore sources. This would be a different contamination, and not improper annealing or mixing. Have you come across anything from the mint related to that while researching for your book?

You should be grading the coin yourself regardless of if you intend to submit it to a TPG with references such as the attached.

Then you might as well buy two of them and throw them both out. At least myself and @powermad5000 have had significant issues with weights being way off using the super cheap scales. If you can't get a decent scale with a calibration weight you might as well give up the search.

I think ANACS was the TPG using that term for "Black Beauty" nickels, which I think is now "Improper Annealing" to be consistent with the big boys.

I wanted to add two books which I think are excellent references considering how many questions are posted on the board about errors and varieties. This includes the Cherrypickers Guide Vol 2 mentioned by PowerMad and the Official Price Guide to Mint Errors, with photos of the covers attached.

That is an unusual one as there is considerable loss of detail and the rims on the reverse, but without similar loss on the obverse. Perhaps it is a dryer coin where the reverse was sliding around for a while on a drum.

Gee, ya think.

That coin I posted was MS-63. For your coin it looks like there is loss of luster and some high point wear on Lincoln's chin and cheek on the obverse as well as some wear of the wheat stalks on the reverse, so no it unfortunately wouldn't make an MS grade.

Looks like some other 1943-S steel cents. Was it over spec weight to make you think it was plated?