1961 Seamaster dial - uncommon, or redial?

[artmuseummusings]

I am perplexed by this crosshair pie-pan dial on a 1961 Omega Seamaster. The movement is calibre 562.
I do not have access to the model number from the case back:



The hands seem too long for the dial, but I do not understand the combination of pie-pan
with overlapping-the-edge applied markers, with the vertical cross-hair not extending
through the Omega symbol at 12 o'clock.

What am I seeing here?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Dan S]

Poorly repainted dial and a hilariously inappropriate crown.

 

[gbesq]

Definitely a redial and not a very good one. The very dark and thick crosshair lines are a dead giveaway.

 

[Davidt]

Stay away!

 

[X350 XJR]

Hope you're asking before buying.

It's a mess!

 

[artmuseummusings]

OK - consensus is "inauthentic" - at minimum a repaint

I'd still like to know why, on a pie pan dial, the gold markers extend past the edge of the pie-pan ledge?

Does someone recognize, without the repaint parts, what manner of dial this is?

I appreciate all the information and recommendations.

 

[X350 XJR]

It's not a pie-pan dial, never was. It's a regular dome dial someone tried to make look like a pie-pan dial.

 

[artmuseummusings]

^
are you suggesting that someone other than Omega bent the metal into that shape?

Oh, my.

 

[TexOmega]

I would suggest actually looking and studying known originals for a few minutes.


Welcome to the Forum, lots to study here, if interested.

 

[X350 XJR]

A artmuseummusings

^
are you suggesting that someone other than Omega bent the metal into that shape?

Oh, my.

It's mostly a trick of light. The outer portion is brushed in a circular fashion the center is more of a sunburst. If you had the dial in hand I doubt there is actually an edge.

And yes, people will go to extreme lengths to separate others from their money, stick around and learn.

 

[Dan S]

A artmuseummusings

^
are you suggesting that someone other than Omega bent the metal into that shape?

Oh, my.

As noted , it’s a dome dial. With more experience you will recognize a poor dial like this in half a second, and just move on.

 

[artmuseummusings]

I definitely want to learn more about Omega. Their designs are wonderful.
The aesthetics and also the mechanisms intrigue me, particularly 1930s-1960s.

The online resources for "how to tell a redial" got me curious about the above example.
There were so many things potentially wrong with it that I wondered if it might be
an uncommon, legitimate variant.

I would value the opportunity to see original examples in person, rather than relying
on photographs.

Thanks again for everyone's input. A nice introduction to the forum, where I have been
an outside observer for some years.

 

[gbesq]

Again, welcome. A year from now you’ll be amazed at how much knowledge you’ve picked up here.

 

[Dan S]

A artmuseummusings

I definitely want to learn more about Omega. Their designs are wonderful.
The aesthetics and also the mechanisms intrigue me, particularly 1930s-1960s.

The online resources for "how to tell a redial" got me curious about the above example.
There were so many things potentially wrong with it that I wondered if it might be
an uncommon, legitimate variant.

I would value the opportunity to see original examples in person, rather than relying
on photographs.

Thanks again for everyone's input. A nice introduction to the forum, where I have been
an outside observer for some years.

You can try to form a network with local collectors, I'm not sure what country you live in, but many places have groups that you can join. This might allow you to handle some watches in person. You can also follow the listings in the private sales section on this forum and wade in slowly with some purchases that are likely to be safer.

 

[padders]

Back to school for you OP. That is a very obvious redial indeed. If you weren't sure, further study is needed urgently. That dial waves at least 5 red flags, maybe even 10 at a push. Learn 2 or 3 and you will benefit greatly.