Omega Seamaster Identification

ConElPueblo · Dec 14, 2016

TNTwatch
Hah, it can be seen in the first post of the thread. It's minor and there can be other causes for that than just redialing. Nothing's perfect and if that's the only one fault compared to other signs, it's not enough to conclude a redial.

Really? I guess I just haven't seen one where some of the markers cover the hashes and some don't - I'd love to see an example of this, but for me this is a surefire sign that it's a redial.

By the way, have anyone seen an Omega with smaller idices at 3-6-9-12 than elsewhere on the dial before? It looks a bit odd.

gatorcpa · Dec 14, 2016

ConElPueblo
By the way, have anyone seen an Omega with smaller idices at 3-6-9-12 than elsewhere on the dial before? It looks a bit odd.

I'm sure that I have at one point. A lot of weird stuff came out of Omega from 1946-52. Without more information, it's impossible to say for sure.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
gatorcpa

hoipolloi · Dec 14, 2016

Here is my 351, 2577 18k solid gold with same Seamaster font but no cross hair.

ConElPueblo · Dec 14, 2016

gatorcpa
I'm sure that I have at one point. A lot of weird stuff came out of Omega from 1946-52. Without more information, it's impossible to say for sure.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
gatorcpa

Cool. It hadn't to do with this watch being a redial or not, just found that it made the watch look a little unbalanced.

TNTwatch · Dec 14, 2016

cicindela
Not sure that showing numerous other watches that are not redials and have better looking dials proves anything about the original gold watch. Perhaps an actually sharp image of the watch.

I'm just saying that your point about the crosshairs not aligned with the hour hash mark means redial is not valid. Isn't it funny that the watch causing lots of disagreement has all blurry pictures? 😀

TNTwatch · Dec 14, 2016

ConElPueblo
Really? I guess I just haven't seen one where some of the markers cover the hashes and some don't - I'd love to see an example of this, but for me this is a surefire sign that it's a redial.

No way that is a sure fire conclusion. As I said earlier, there're other possible causes for that than redialing. Manufacturing defects, user/watchmaker mishandling or just natural degradation could all cause the same issue, in addition to exaggeration by camera/lighting angles... Your guess is just one of many possibilities and, lacking other blatant signs of redial, is not a sure fire.

ConElPueblo · Dec 14, 2016

TNTwatch
No way that is a sure fire conclusion. As I said earlier, there're other possible causes for that than redialing. Manufacturing defects, user/watchmaker mishandling or just natural degradation could all cause the same issue, in addition to exaggeration by camera/lighting angles... Your guess is just one of many possibilities and, lacking other blatant signs of redial, is not a sure fire.

Well, let's say that the blurry picture turns out being reasonably accurate and there indeed are misaligned markers - are you saying that this could have happened from the factory - Omega in the late fifties or so? I'm no expert, but must say that the only inaccurately printed dials I have seen were somewhat earlier than this. And that have been with wholly printed dials, not with applied markers. Note that I wrote "for me" in regard to it being a sure fire sign, and I'll stick to that 😀

(...clearer pictures would be welcome!)

TNTwatch · Dec 14, 2016

ConElPueblo
Well, let's say that the blurry picture turns out being reasonably accurate and there indeed are misaligned markers - are you saying that this could have happened from the factory - Omega in the late fifties or so? I'm no expert, but must say that the only inaccurately printed dials I have seen were somewhat earlier than this. And that have been with wholly printed dials, not with applied markers. Note that I wrote "for me" in regard to it being a sure fire sign, and I'll stick to that 😀

(...clearer pictures would be welcome!)

It's one possibility. There are lots of printed errors on Omega's Speedmaster dials, up until late 70s at least, that I'm sure you've seen but haven't noticed.

ConElPueblo · Dec 14, 2016

TNTwatch
It's one possibility. There are lots of printed errors on Omega's Speedmaster dials, up until late 70s at least, that I'm sure you've seen but haven't noticed.

More than a slight chance of that! 😁

TNTwatch · Dec 14, 2016

ConElPueblo
More than a slight chance of that! 😁

They're just usually called dial "variants/variations", instead of errors. 😁

gatorcpa · Dec 14, 2016

ConElPueblo
are you saying that this could have happened from the factory

In short, yes.

Almost all Swiss watch companies outsourced their dial manufacturing to outside companies.

In some cases, the finished products might not have even been assembled in Switzerland. It was common for movements, dials, etc. to be shipping separately to the US for assembly by watchmakers here.

I don't that's necessarily what happened with the OP's watches (the Türler one being likely all Swiss), but anything is possible. I have seen many original dials from that era with small defects that would not be acceptable by today's standards.

In particular, the style of the word "Seamaster" on that dial would be very difficult for a redialler to duplicate without the original plates. Even then, if the re-printing on a redial was too heavy, it would be over the entire dial, not just then crosshairs.

The aging on this one looks very natural. However, I still hesitate to call it original as the rest of the watch is still a mystery.
gatorcpa

Omega Seamaster Identification

ConElPueblo

gatorcpa

hoipolloi

ConElPueblo

TNTwatch

TNTwatch

ConElPueblo

TNTwatch

ConElPueblo

TNTwatch

gatorcpa

Similar threads

Newby Question RE: Seamaster Identification

Omega Seamaster identification assitance

Vintage Seamaster identification

Omega Jubilee bracelet Identification

Omega Seamaster - help with identification and concern/issue spotting

Watch identification