Horological Meandering

Dear Purists,

This question is linked to the one above. There are no right or wrong answers. I am simply interested in your reactions to different aesthetic features on watches and why.

My interest in watches started with movements. However, since ‘hanging out’ with all of you for the last couple of years I have broadened my appreciation of design aesthetics related to dials and cases. I am therefore interested to know what design features attract or repel you.

I realise that much of this comes down to individual preference, like dial symmetry versus asymmetry, but I am interested to hear if there are particular things you look for in watches or particular things that bother you.

I will start off by mentioning a few. I don’t like subdials that partially ‘eat’ into the hour numbers, text identifying obvious functions like “Date”, subdials that are clustered together on a large watch, and tiny date apertures.

Any thoughts?

Andrew

Andrew,

It was design more than mechanics that drew me to collecting watches.  It's clear to me that my preferences in watch design are a direct reflection of my tastes in architecture, furnishings, pens, guns, and knives, all of which interests antedated serious watch collecting.  For me, it is Bauhaus and industrial design that make a watch interesting, which translates to these elements:

Attractive:  sand-blasted, brushed, matted, and blackened finishes; straight lines, angles, and planes; visible screws and bolts that serve a function; legible dials; no functions that aren't used daily; an appearance of ruggedness and dependability; an absence of decoration that holds no function.  Examples:  Most models of AP Royal Oak, AP Royal Oak Offshore, Richard Mille, and the MIH watch.

Aversive:  polished or shiny metal, colored metal, decorations, fanciness, fussiness, showiness, seldom used functions, and unnecessary curves.  Examples:  Most models of Roger Dubois, Franck Mueller, and Cartier.

Even a single feature, such as Brequet hands, an onion crown, a font with cerephs, or the use of script can ruin the look of a watch for me.  An example I recall from a few years back was an IWC chronograph in titanium that was nearly perfect, but to which had been added some highly aversive writing in script that conflicted completely with the design.

All of this is personal taste and the mental associations that design features hold for the individual, but you asked.

Park

 

 

 

Hi Park,

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

One of the things that make this hobby so interesting is that we come to it with such diverse backgrounds and interests. It is amazing that a wristwatch can encompass all of these attributes from micromechanical engineering to beautiful and elegant design to pure pieces of art.

 

I find it interesting to try and ‘see’ timepieces through other peoples eyes; hence the reason for this question. It is by this process that I come to appreciate different aspects of watches that I would have perhaps otherwise overlooked.

 

I appreciate your input.

 

Kind regards,

 

Andrew

Since the question asks "what doesn't work for me" I really don't care for Roman numeral hour markers nor am I a big fan of "big" designs.

… I’m OK with applied Roman numerals, but I prefer Arabic numerals when they are ‘painted’ on the dial. Perhaps influenced here by the look of specific watches like the Lange 1.

 

Andrew

and the subdials for the chrono, perpetual calendar, power reserve, etc. are too close to the middle.  These watch designs are not to my liking at all.

Cheers,
Anthony

No message body

A heavy handed approach to branding.

Over design - design for the sake of it.

Claiming a movement is "in house" when it has been outsourced and simply refinished.

Illegible face - ie a watch where it becomes difficult to actually read the time.

Asymmetric faces – for example a sub second dial placed at 5 O’clock.

Partially occluded numerals on a dial.

Bejeweled cases.

… of the brand and the way it markets itself is a real issue.

 

Although I try to keep an open mind, some of the styling and advertising directions of Zenith, for example, have clouded what I previously thought of this company. Thankfully, the El Primero movement remains and I probably shouldn’t be too critical if they can steer new and younger people to an interest in horology.

 

Regards

 

Andrew