Good evening, folks.

As this is my first 'I'm curious about authenticity' post, I thought I'd muffle the audible groan I just heard (not to mention about one thousand 'here we go again' eye rolls) by taking a stab at answering my own question. After all, this style - and year - are at top of my must have list. Maybe it's a legit specimen, but I have my doubts.

I suspect I'll get a heap of stuff wrong; nevertheless, rather than simply rely solely on your valuable expertise and noob benevolence, I'll try to employ some of what I hope I've learned since my skulking began over the weekend, and hope I don't score too poorly. I very much appreciate your assistance - and ongoing teaching. And for the record, your enthusiasm is magnificent. So (deep breath) here goes.

- dial looks like it was made yesterday, not 1962
- caseback. No Hippocampus (although an engravable back may have been possible?).
- Polished movement seem inconsistent with case, crown etc.
- lumed hands; non lumed markers?
-19xx appears consistent with year (1962)
-admittedly, I'm confused by 14905 (9 as third number? Thought it went to 8?)

Looking to learn as much as I can over the next few weeks, months and years.

Cheers,

Michael

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/MENs-1962-VINTAGE-OMEGA-SEAMASTER-DE-VILLE-AUTO-StSTEEL-ORIG-DIAL-550-Adj-2-Pos/332397704210?_trkparms=aid=222007&algo=SIM.MBE&ao=2&asc=20170831090034&meid=2912a77fc0e149cfa16b076863750922&pid=100005&rk=2&rkt=6&mehot=pp&sd=172871200013&_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

Dial looks original to me.

Movement is in good condition. Doesn’t have to match the case? Case is has been polished but bevels still visible.

 

Dial looks ok to me, and as these have a monocoque case the movement and dial often remain in better condition.
Though for a seller who sells a lot of watches the pictures could be much better.

 

What is wrong with the photos?
So that I can avoid making those mistakes too.

 

I think there is a lack of clarity, sure they show the good aspects well, but I think clearer pics of all sides give the buyer more information. In the second picture you can see some scratches on the 4 o'clock lug, but none of the other pictures seem to show it clearly. Making it hard to confirm how bad the scratches are.

 

Thanks, everyone. Much appreciated. Helps immeasurably. Now, any thoughts about the case back? Cheers!

 

Missed that. They are indeed.

 

Shouldnt the dial be marked T swiss T with lumed hands?

 

They generally do, but it's not a hard and fast rule and I've heard of original dials with tritium but no T's