Forums Latest Members
  1. jar Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    7
    Likes
    2
    Fine Folks of Omega Forums:

    At this time of year, I was hoping to point wifey in the right direction. I am considering the following watch which is indicated to be c1960, Caliber 600, Seamaster.

    My question is largely regarding the dial. Is this a dial that Omega did, or has this guy been refinished extensively? I have not been able to find an all silver face with like similar "soft" pie pan form. Some two tone dials seem to have the same form, but I've not seen an all silver variant in other pic web searches. I suspect this dial may have been customized to this brushed steel look (which is pretty cool in my opinion).

    Thoughts regarding the origins of the dial, and other comments in general welcome, and thank you all kindly for the input.

    Kind regards.
     
    SeamasterSilver.jpg SeamasterSilverDial.jpg SeamasterSilverDial2.jpg SeamasterSilverMovement.jpg SeamasterSilverBack.jpg SeamasterCaseBack.jpg
  2. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
  3. jar Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    7
    Likes
    2
    Fine Folks of Omega Forums:

    As with my previous post, looking to understand a bit more about the attached silver faced Seamaster. This listing indicates a silver Seamaster c1958, with a "professionally refinished" dial. I am most keen to understand to what extent the attached has been "professionally refinished"....The gold on silver look of this dial is aesthetically appealing to me, but in other web searches I have been unable to locate other examples of like similar. Definitely come across silver faces, but not silver with the "brushed" look as shown in the attached images.

    Thoughts and opinions with regard to the dial, or any other attributes folks may notice is welcome and appreciated.
    Thank you kindly in advance.

    SilverSeamaster Dial.jpg SilverSeamasterBack.jpg SilverSeamasterCaseBack.jpg SilverSeamasterCrown.jpg SilverSeamasterMovement.jpg
     
  4. jar Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    7
    Likes
    2
    Yah, I came across him as well - the closest I could find.
    I agree, the form of the two dials is the same.
    However, I note the nature of the "brushed" look radiating from the center of the dial in the images I attached.
    In your image, I see more of a flat silver without the "brushed" look.
    I'm interested to understand if Omega did a "brushed" look, or if that was someone's "custom" tune of an Omega dial......
    Of course, I suppose it could just be a difference of photography, and that I'm reading too much into the images - which would be good to know as well....

    Thanks for the thoughts!!
     
  5. ConElPueblo Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    There are examples of brushed silver dials (I've owned a Constellation like that), but this example looks shit.

    Professionally refinished only means that someone took money for ruining the dial instead of doing it for free.
     
    efauser and tyrantlizardrex like this.
  6. dsio Ash @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    26,760
    Likes
    32,473
    Just use one thread mate not several
     
    tyrantlizardrex likes this.
  7. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    I have no idea what you are talking about. Taking pictures through a crystal, particularly an older one that is aged, yellowed, scratched, etc. is always going to mute some the features. Not all seller use the same camera, lighting, or angles. That's going to make a difference also.

    The watch I posted is identical in every way to the one you are looking at. Only thing different is the serial number.

    Here's another view in which you can clearly see the differences in the two tones. Look at how the light stops reflecting at the minutes register ( between 4 and 5) and is diffused in the center where the dial finish is brushed.

    [​IMG]

    This effect is exactly what you are looking for. Doesn't get much better than that.

    That second watch is a refinished watch that was ridden hard and hung up wet. ::puke::I would call it "semi-professionally" refinished.

    Your first choice is a nice one, and if the price is $500 or under, you should be OK.
    gatorcpa
     
  8. Edward53 Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    3,127
    Likes
    5,384
    I thought the first watch looked fine. I also noticed that the minute markers round 4 and (particularly) 5 aren't quite correctly aligned. It surprises me that Omega QC let that through, but the dial looks so right that it must be original, surely?
     
  9. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    You really need a head-on shot to judge perspective. Very few people know how to do that kind of photography correctly.

    One of them hangs out here sometimes.

    https://omegaforums.net/threads/this-is-what-hoarding-looks-like.49464/

    gatorcpa
     
  10. Edward53 Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    3,127
    Likes
    5,384
    I take that point, but the dial has been photographed from left and right and both photos show the same misalignment so it's not due to the camera angle. I still believe the dial is original.
     
  11. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    This dial is refinished, not good, avoid
     
  12. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 8, 2016

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    What are you seeing there that I don't see?

    Trying to learn something, too.
    gatorcpa
     
  13. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 9, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    Not sure we are all talking about the same watch. I like the OP & Gator watches, not the silver, no paint one. I don't like the Seamaster script and the minute marker alignment.
     
    gatorcpa likes this.
  14. Edward53 Dec 9, 2016

    Posts
    3,127
    Likes
    5,384
    The one Gator posted looks fine and the one in the third post is an obvious redial, so by the OP watch I'm assuming you mean the one in the first post? But that's the one with misaligned minute markers which you say you don't like! ::confused2::
     
  15. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 9, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    No the third post watch is the one I am referring to.