Personally and aesthetically speaking (if done well) I don't mind a repainted watch face but I often see enthusiasts frowning upon it. Is there any reason for this other than it no longer being 100% original (i.e. it damages the watch etc)?
Well there are several reasons why redials are less favored a. some are downright ugly or just plain weird when badly done b. even when well done, there are often minor inconsistencies that visually bother collectors This is why redials (in general) tend to lower the value vs an original untouched dial. There are however dials that are so far gone, a redial is needed. But in general collectors prefer an untouched dial with patina, compared to a unnaturally pristine redial.
Athough the movement and case are hugely important, when you look at a watch, the dial makes up a huge part of what you're seeing. Why buy an omega with a case and movement from Switzerland, if the face of the watch was painted by Bob in Solihull. Most models are plentiful enough that you don't need to accept this compromise. Any similarity to actual dial refinishers in Solihull, called Bob is purely coincidental.
It all depends a) on the rarity of the watch b) the quality of the re-print - if it meets all original specs I can accept a re-dial, but most of the dial restorers either don´t know how it should look like or do not bother to meet the original design even when you send a perfect photo of an original dial together with the damaged dial...
Of all the watches I've ever owned I've always been the least satisfied with those that were redials. No exceptions.
My 1927 Hamilton Barrel has been redialed, but it was done by the same company who did the original work decades ago. They still have blueprints, processes, etc. I have no problem with that. In my mind it's refurbished to original condition.
According to Rene' Rondeau, redialing does not impact the pricing on Hamiltons. I do see where Omega Addict (member here) on Ebay buys, overhauls, frequently redials, and polishes the heck out of the watches. They still seem to bring a relatively high price considering. http://www.ebay.com/sch/m.html?item...Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&_ssn=omega_addict&_sop=3Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network I guess he targets the non-collector market that wants a "nice looking" vintage watch.
I remember reading hodinkee claimed that the dial makes 90% or more of the value of a watch. On the other hand its nothing but personal preference i guess. Just dont pay as much for a refinish.
I don't mind a redial done correctly, but I had one that had to be sent back like three times before it even remotely looked right... and like the original! Tom
Like many other things in life I will leave this to the guy who pays for the watch. Not everyone carry watchmaker loupes in their pockets on a regular basis. A well executed redial (they do exist) can save a watch from otherwise being butchered or discarded. I have friends that could not care less for the thickness of the print for a given character in some logo. But they like a cool looking vintage watch, and will live happily with a well redialled Seamaster as they do not carry said loupe. That leaves more good ones to the few others of us.
Speaking from the perspective of one who is early into this hobby, and has bought two watches that are redials, this is absolutely correct. I liked them at the beginning, when I didn't know enough to understand what it meant. They now sit there in my watch box and taunt me. I am going to hang on to them at this stage because I can't imagine I can shift them, and they are a good reminder of what not to do. . No more redials.
If ultra-rare and I bought for peanuts, or an heirloom piece from my Father/Grandfather? Maybe, depending how nasty the dial.
