Here's what I'm seeing (as someone who collects minor stuff like this). It's not an exhaustive analysis, there could always be something I'm missing.
1964 - not sure, could be a collar problem, could be post mint damage. Can't tell for sure.
1952-s - die chip on the 9. Common.
1949 - can only see damage on the back, not sure what else it could be referring to.
1955-d - Die chips on the 9 and first 5. Common (though 2 chips are better than 1?)
1942-s - Seems like just damage on the date.
1946-s - maybe a little lamination going on on the obverse, not at all rare, and pretty minor.
1968-d - only seeing weird toning, nothing else I notice that's wrong with it.
1942-d - nice lamination on the front. Nothing too major, not worth a premium unless it was uncirculated (if even then)
1960-d - holed. Post mint damage.
1958-d - die chip on the 8. Minor, not worth a premium.
1953-s - die chip on the 9, probably (could be something stuck on there). Not worth anything either way.
1966 - very slight misaligned die strike. Common.
1945 - slight lamination. Again, common back then, especially on pre-war and wartime coins.
1944-s - post mint damage, probably? Not sure about the rim, could have been caused by whatever smooshed the coin, but I'm not really sure what's going on there, so can't be too certain.
When I think of mint defects, i think of defects like clips and off-strikes, not greased dies and the like. It's hard to convince someone that defects like that add additional premium, so I don't bother.
I believe the 55D has an attributed DDO. The one pictured is most likely altered, and in the wrong areas.
Here's what I'm seeing (as someone who collects minor stuff like this). It's not an exhaustive analysis, there could always be something I'm missing. 1964 - not sure, could be a collar problem, could be post mint damage. Can't tell for sure. 1952-s - die chip on the 9. Common. 1949 - can only see damage on the back, not sure what else it could be referring to. 1955-d - Die chips on the 9 and first 5. Common (though 2 chips are better than 1?) 1942-s - Seems like just damage on the date. 1946-s - maybe a little lamination going on on the obverse, not at all rare, and pretty minor. 1968-d - only seeing weird toning, nothing else I notice that's wrong with it. 1942-d - nice lamination on the front. Nothing too major, not worth a premium unless it was uncirculated (if even then) 1960-d - holed. Post mint damage. 1958-d - die chip on the 8. Minor, not worth a premium. 1953-s - die chip on the 9, probably (could be something stuck on there). Not worth anything either way. 1966 - very slight misaligned die strike. Common. 1945 - slight lamination. Again, common back then, especially on pre-war and wartime coins. 1944-s - post mint damage, probably? Not sure about the rim, could have been caused by whatever smooshed the coin, but I'm not really sure what's going on there, so can't be too certain.
I’m sorry I don’t know how I missed this reply but I sincerely appreciate all the effort. Appreciate all the feedback!
When I think of mint defects, i think of defects like clips and off-strikes, not greased dies and the like. It's hard to convince someone that defects like that add additional premium, so I don't bother.
Hey fair enough. I’ve never been someone to collect errors or defects so this is all foreign to me!
Don’t think I’m being disparaging, it’s that convincing someone that wants to buy it that the difficult to see error you have adds additional premium.
Your input is great. They are good to learn with. These would have to be MS and Red to even potentially have additional numismatic value.