A close friend and WIS is wondering if this beauty is too good to be true. I know Omega made a salmon dial, as I’ve seen @CanberraOmega ’s beauty. This dial is superb, and my not-as-well-trained-as-many-others-on-ΩF eyes don’t see anything glaring to be worried, and THAT has me worried .. Whatcha think, guys? These are all of the photos of it available so far..
Looks like a redial to me. Lume dots are very new, minute markers are not equally spaced and some of the printing, especially on 'Automatic' looks poor. These dials are out of my comfort zone though so I'm going on general thoughts, not reference specific.
I want to say redial, but the font to me look identical to this example. However, there appears to be no aging whatsoever and the placement of the 9 marker in particular looks off to me. I would guess very good redial? Probably would be most helpful to track down some pictures of the same salmon dial color on other examples to see how it should age.
It may be the pictures, but the quality of the print in your example looks worlds apart from that in the OP.
I really appreciate the input so far. I thought the dial was too nice and pretty to be original, but couldn’t come up with any specific reasons, so thanks.
I vote redial, placement if 8:00 and 10:00 Dial markers versus printing in the first OP pic is another thing
I vote decent redial as well If you compare the 12, 3, 6, and 9 dial subdial markers, they are of lesser quality print on the salmon dial than the control example.
When looking at the ‘M’ in ‘AUTOMATIC’ I can see a total lack of serif... pretty obvious to me now.. thanks!
You people are genius indeed!! It’s amazing to see dial specialists, color specialists, hands specialists and font specialists at one place discussing about a watch at ease with equally amazing results.... thanks dudes.
I've heard they are looking for someone with experience in lining up printed indices with applied markers...