Omega

I have been offered this nice Omega but are in doubt if the dial, as the seller says, are 100% original.

The font in Seamaster are unusual, but I know there have been several producers of dial to early Seamasters .????

There is aging at the dial. Possitive

Swiss made is in very small fonts very low at the dial. Possitive

It is difficuld to see if the line through 6 and 12 and Omega applied logo is in the midle because og shadows and angle ????

what do you think?







Rgs Baun

Very big difference on how to write Seamaster. - I found these in a book:

1[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030402.jpg[/img]

2[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030401.jpg[/img]

3[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030400.jpg[/img]

4[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030399.jpg[/img]

5[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030398.jpg[/img]

6[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030397.jpg[/img]

7[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030396.jpg[/img]

8[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030395.jpg[/img]

9[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030394.jpg[/img]

10[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030392.jpg[/img]

11[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030392.jpg[/img]

12[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030391.jpg[/img]

13[img]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a184/baunc/Seamaster/P1030390.jpg[/img]

vh Baun

rgs baun

Hi,

it does not look bad to me...

But there are experts like Desmond and Hoi who are better informed about fonts.

I am sure they will chime in later today.

regards

erich

Taken head on with watch on its back, 12 o'clock marker facing north.  The 12 to 6 line not being centered is the most concerning thing for me at this time.  Rest of the watch looks nice. 

...is that the condition of the dial and movement are similar.  On this watch, both are in very nice condition.  The movement caliber matches the case reference.  I have seen other Seamaster Chronometre watches with the same font and markers.  The dial passes Mondodec's "MOY" test.  It has "Swiss Made" at the bottom.  While none of these factors are 100% definitive of originality, having all of them is a very good sign.

Like MSNWatch pointed out, it is always important to have head-on photographs of the dial.

My guess is that it is all OK, but I've been wrong before,

gatorcpa

With modern reprint technique, it's impossible to tell with pictures like that.

...and I like it a lot! :~)

I haven't been around any of the boards much lately.  After all, it is my busy season at work.  Tax returns are due in the next two weeks and my time is not my own this month.

Take care and see you in May,

gatorcpa

it may or may not be refinished, but it does look very good and thats the important thing. if you like it go for it, any doubts, forget it.

i'd happily own it going by the pics i can see, refinished or not.

best

G

The seller says that both he and his watchmaker believe it is the original dial and also he has said that I can return it if I am not happy.

So now I will do the payment and look forward ti recieve my first early Seamaster Chronometre.

Thanks for your advice.

rgs Baun

....but could be wrong on this.  My problem with that dial is also the 12 to 6 crosshair line.  All the original dials I've seen show it running just inside the spine of the E in OMEGA, where that one seems to run underneath it.  

I always hate to see a bold crosshair. That's always a bad sign to me

I tend to think the dial could be refinished, or be yet another example of a marginally out of whack dial.

While cross hairs being marginally off centre can be a feature of real original Seamaster dials, usually the spaces between the applied markers and the minute indices are equidistant (with exceptions).  I notice, if my reading of the pic is correct that quite a few markers (2, 8 10, 11) dont have equal distances between marker and applied marker.

That having been said, I'd like a closer look at the uppercase fonts and the seamaster script.  There were variations of the double-coathanger script because different contract dial makers produced dials for Omega, thus making it difficult to make comparisons.

I would ask your watchmaker to confirm that there is no glue at the rivets on the rear of the dial, as only the very best refinishers, re-tap the rivets in by hand after refinishing a dial.

Cheers

Desmond

...hadn't occurred to me to consider that but it makes perfect sense.

. . . and a well-preserved one at that.  The perfect positioning of the hands against the markers is the factor that tips my amateur judgement.

... I thought you had a short "no new watch period" after our trip to Basel

I feel like I am alowed to do now

I have recieved the watch now and it looks ok to me. It still has to passs my watchmaker Peter Halse, Horsens before I am sure.

but some pics.... in the right case also (I like that):





and one where I have tryed to bring the patina up by adding contrast



It also have a backside



I like mirroing text in blank backsides, sorry....

rgd baun

Thanks to all that gave valubel input to me. nice to get help when needed.

rgs baun

Aside from the crosshairs looking a bit thick, the word chronometre is not aligned with the word automatic - one or both words are not properly centered.  Not only does it look like a refinish but one with this obvious flaw.

Apart from the flaw/s pointed out, the minute-track markers are not equidistant, obvious at 3, 6, 9 and 12 o'clock.