Opinion on Ed White handset

Hi everyone, my name is Paul and I am asking for help on the originality of the handset of my 105.003-64. Based on service history (a watchmaker receipt from the previous owner), I know for sure that the hands were “repaired” in the past, however I am still not sure whether the chronograph hand is an original from the 60s or a later replacement. As far as I can tell, it has the correct length so it is not the slightly shorter luminova version but maybe there are other versions of the replacement with the correct length as well?

I also did my homework and took a couple of lume shots to compare the dial and hands with other Tritium and Luminova watches. I am comparing three vintage Speedmasters and a Tudor Black Bay 36 with Luminova dial and hands. It is a sequence of photos just after exposure to UV light, after 30 seconds and after 60 seconds. The watch I am asking about is on the left and clearly those hands were touched up as parts of the minutes and hour hand as well as the chrono seconds hand glow slightly brighter and longer than the plots on the dial. The good news is that the glow is almost completely gone after 1 minute indicating it wasn’t fixed with luminova I guess.

Any opinion is welcome and will be helpful - Thanks.

I think hands are earlier tritium service hands. They look a bit white but in good shape I wouldn’t worry about them it looks good.

Looks fine, goes nicely with the dial.

Thanks for the quick and helpful responses! I like the watch quite a lot despite the clean/white hands which takes away a bit of its vintage charm in my opinion. It came with a 7912/6 bracelet stamped 1/66 as well as a bit of the initial owners history making it am honest watch to wear from time to time. Taken together, your answers are reassuring that the hands are pretty much fine and I am not sure whether I want to go deeper down the rabbit hole regarding this topic.

@Aludic - I tried to add as much information as I could and thought the lume shots were a nice illustration; glad you like the presentation. As said above I m not sure I want to dig much deeper into this. Also I am afraid I don't have a camera able to capture such details...

But I have another question regarding this watch and the crystal. I already brought this up before, however wasn't very successful in getting any answers (https://omegaforums.net/threads/speedmaster-a1-crystal-versus-newer-versions.181791/). I took a couple of additional photos that show the differences in the overall appearance of the watch/dial across watches with different crystals.

Shown are a 105.012-63. the 105.003-64 and a 145.022-68. In my opinion the hour plots of the two watches to the left and the right appear much longer/larger than the one in the middle. I tried to indicate this by green arrows. At the bottom it's the same watches from the side with the crystal height indicated. While the middle crystal is an original A1 I was wondering if the smaller dial appearance is a) due to differences in the crystals (A1 vs later ones) or b) due to heavy polishing (reduced crystal height as indicated).

Visually I like the larger appearing plots more and was thinking multiple times to replace the old A1 with a new one, however my watchmaker is telling me that the A1 is worn down and he most likely would destroy it when pushing it out of the case. This is what is preventing me from replacement as I also want to keep the watch in its original state as long as possible. I couldn't find anything useful on this topic on the forum or anywhere else so I am interested what other people think.

Cool presentation and watch collection !
Could be due to paralax distortion and/or one lower crystal but the middle one does seem to have less lume.

I agree that there is less lume on the Ed White but don't see how this would affect plot length. Also I understand that optical distortions will have a pretty large effect on how the plots come out visually. However, when I picked up the Ed White and put it next to the other watches in direct comparison my first impression was 'wow that dial looks a bit too small'.

So without going too much into the details of above photos which should be seen as simple illustrations of the effect I was wondering if other members also 'see' this in some of their watches? In these 3 watches to me the effect is obvious independent of the viewing angle. Also the step in the Ed White dial is not visible as pronounced as in the other 2 watches.

I totally agree that this the way to go - maybe I find some time to do the comparison in a more scientific way. I am not trying to say that these plots are substantially different in size in reality, it's just about the optical distortions and as I like the stronger distorted look (larger) more I was thinking to sacrifice the old A1 and get a new crystal installed.