I agree - I was quite disappointed by the Goldberg pictures. Not only are they low resolution, but they have a strange green hue on the edges. That being said, I lot-viewed this in person and had two very well known dealers do the same for me and it is most definitely genuine with intact edges. Incidentally, there was one fake discovered very late in this Goldberg auction, a Trajan aureus, so it certainly isn't guaranteed even at large auction houses of prominent collections. As for the other images, I took some and some are professional photos. The ones that I took that came out well in my eyes are the Distater, Hadrian aureus, Ptolemy IV octadrachm, bar cent, and 1808/7 $5. The Antoninus Pius photo is really the gem of the bunch in terms of accuracy - as you've described, it really captures the surfaces well. In-hand, they have a nice reflective luster as well which I've been trying to capture myself without success. Thanks for the compliments, everyone!!
I've posted a few more times now and have diminished my ratio I should have made subsequent posts count more
Well before the rest of you new guys throw us old CTers under the bus, you should know the like system was implemented not that long ago. I don't think I have made 8k posts that "no one liked", then again I post in the bullion section also so maybe I have.
The largest are the octadrachms, at 27-28 millimeters (a little larger than a $10 gold coin from the US) and weighing in at about 28 grams, or about 90% of one ounce of gold. As for price, I'll opt to not share that here but prices of similar pieces can be found online with some research The dekadrachm (the first coin I posted) is much larger - almost as large as a US silver dollar and weighing 43 grams (about 1.4 ounces) and is considerably more expensive today than the octadrachms but historically would have been worth much less. Records are a bit unclear but from what I've found, one of the gold octadrachms back in ~200 BC would have been able to buy about 100 sheep. Frankly, I'd prefer the coin