I guess Nero didn't care about a flattering likeness?
The early Empire was a time of realism for coin portraiture. If the emperor was ugly, the coins showed him as ugly. This contrasts strongly with the "idealism" of Greek coinage, which minimised flaws and accentuated beauty, and the "abstraction" of later Roman and Byzantine coins, where the portrait is intended to show the power, majesty, grandeur and authority of the office of emperor, rather than the identity of the emperor himself.
You could take an early Roman Empire coin, and use it to pick the emperor's face out from amongst a crowd.
Does anyone else collect Roman silver denarii?
I have 42 of them, ranging from the early Republic period (my earliest is attributed to 157 BC) up to the mid-200's AD, by which time the denarius was fast becoming obsolete.
Please post some pictures of them if you have any.
Four of them are already in my gallery: this one of Caracalla...
...another one of the same emperor...
...this one of Elagabalus....
...and this one of Hadrian, which I only seem to have scanned the reverse of...
I've just added a fifth to the gallery - my most recently acquired denarius filled a hole in my OFERE collection (one from each Roman emperor): Nero's successor, Galba. This one also dates from 68 AD:
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis