Most of us have been asked this sort of Chinese handcuffs question by a spouse or girlfriend. You know, the questions that require us to lie in order to spare the feelings of someone for whom we care. Lying is sometimes the only reasonable course to take. In a watch forum, it looks more like this: "I just got this 145.012 and am so excited to show everyone. Isn't the patina amazing? The indices match the hands perfectly, and the color is uniform....and...what do you all think about it?" Now, not even a veteran collector can be certain about new lum when it's done very well, at least not without being able to check the watch in hand, but most of the dial work being done is either TOO perfect or not perfect enough and can be identified with a good inspection. It is also unclear as to whether hands should or shouldn't match because on some watches, the lum ages similarly, and on others, the hands can age much differently. I tend to find original watches will have at least one hand missing at least some material. The sweep seconds hands on my old watches tends to lose its lum first. That is not to say one cannot find a 2915 with all original lum in the hands. (I have one that has survived intact.) My point is, perfect hands are often re lumed hands, and perfect, beautifully colored indices are often re lumed. Recently, I saw two Speedmasters posted with re lumed dials and hands. Sometimes the color of the patina is a giveaway, since in my experience, 145.012-67 and the 68 transitional dials do not take on that golden/orangy color seen on radium dials, but some dial artists do not know this, and they apply color that just isn't correct. (possibly at the direction of the owner) The method of painting and the thickness of material can also be a problem. Original lum was not generally applied with as much care and is often not thick, whereas many re lumed dials have too much lum applied. In the end, it's not always easy to spot new lum, since the best artisans are able to make their work look very much like factory work. I'm beating around the butt. My question is, how many of us have seen dials, hands, etc that have almost certainly been doctored in posts from members whose feelings we don't want to hurt so we chose to not mention the concern? If it's a relatively new member, like myself, veterans will likely point out the problems, but if the watch is the pride and joy of a longtime member or friend, would you tell them the truth? Do you? "Yes, Bob, those pants make your ass look huuuuuuge." Not likely. And the other situation I see is the collector with the beautiful 321 or early 861 Speedmaster with a nice case, dial, hands....but is sporting a bezel that I see lovingly described as "meteorite." In decades of Speedmaster owning, I never came upon a mismatch like that. If the bezel was destroyed, the case and other parts are probably also rough. Maybe these damaged bezels are repros that are being "aged" to cover the fact that they are not legit. No doubt that happens. Whatever the case, a beautiful watch deserves a bezel that matches, whether it's a service part or original. It's heartbreaking to see this one, and I know no one wants to point it out, but it SHOULD be pointed out. If a case with less than sharp edges can be shouted out again and again, a thrashed bezel should be addressed, too. I'd argue the bezel is much worse. So, when asked, do you give the answer that helps you get lucky, or do you tell the truth and sleep on the couch?