- Posts
- 1,795
- Likes
- 9,019
140dave
·Hi OF,
Have a recent addition that I would like your opinion on the lume. This watch was bought with bad pictures but at a price I was willing to take the risk even seeing a bit of oddness in the dial lume in the bad photos. I am not much of a photographer, hoping these shots will help but if better are needed let me know and I'll try again (and again as needed) these are my first try w/a macro lens on an iphone. Its really focused on the lume so you miss some of the fine details like the serif on the bezel numbers and the concentric circles on the subdials, but all are there.
General Notes: Crystal and dial are dirty as heck, needs a cleaning and service badly, just hoping for a little clarity on the lume as that will make a difference as to where I send it for service. It was bought from one of those flippers/dealers/garage sales finders on ebay that always has 100+ listing for jewelry & watches usually in the $20-$500 range but once in a while has a nice piece in the mix.
My notes, observations, questions:
145.022-68 Transitional, received EOA
Generally in Very Good- condition with very little wear, strong watch IMO overall.
Lume is puffy and wide, a bit sloppy in places, not typical from my observations
BUT
Lume material appears correct compared to other I own (just my visual observation and I obviously have knowledge gaps)
Lume dial material glows stronger than the hands, but hands have more decay. Both fade quickly and evenly, very similar to my 145.022-69 & -71 models that both have original lume material.
SO
If relumed for appearance, why not do the hands also? And if done for appearance, for resale value, it most likely wouldnt have ended up in the hands of the seller I got it from and at that price.
If a vintage relume for functionality (cracking, peeling lume material), why would the rest of the watch show so little wear and no interior service markings? I guess if done for functional reasons it could explain why the hands were not redone and not everyone does a service mark of course.
If done recently I would expect to see the hands done too, and would expect better work quality to be honest. (They used proper material but didnt have the skills to properly apply it?)
OR...
Was it just an overloaded, worn down screen used on the printing of the dial? I have read multiple threads that say this happened sometimes but dont know if thats true or just wishful thinking.
I would like it to be that 👍 but wouldnt be asking the question if I knew and was unwilling to hear a different answer from someone who knows more than I.... and there are 3-4 specific members opinions I am really hoping for.
And now, the watch and some lume plots....
Thoughts appreciated. I think most of us have a thing or two to learn about lume and I dont mind being a learning point for all. Thanks OF!
Have a recent addition that I would like your opinion on the lume. This watch was bought with bad pictures but at a price I was willing to take the risk even seeing a bit of oddness in the dial lume in the bad photos. I am not much of a photographer, hoping these shots will help but if better are needed let me know and I'll try again (and again as needed) these are my first try w/a macro lens on an iphone. Its really focused on the lume so you miss some of the fine details like the serif on the bezel numbers and the concentric circles on the subdials, but all are there.
General Notes: Crystal and dial are dirty as heck, needs a cleaning and service badly, just hoping for a little clarity on the lume as that will make a difference as to where I send it for service. It was bought from one of those flippers/dealers/garage sales finders on ebay that always has 100+ listing for jewelry & watches usually in the $20-$500 range but once in a while has a nice piece in the mix.
My notes, observations, questions:
145.022-68 Transitional, received EOA
Generally in Very Good- condition with very little wear, strong watch IMO overall.
Lume is puffy and wide, a bit sloppy in places, not typical from my observations
BUT
Lume material appears correct compared to other I own (just my visual observation and I obviously have knowledge gaps)
Lume dial material glows stronger than the hands, but hands have more decay. Both fade quickly and evenly, very similar to my 145.022-69 & -71 models that both have original lume material.
SO
If relumed for appearance, why not do the hands also? And if done for appearance, for resale value, it most likely wouldnt have ended up in the hands of the seller I got it from and at that price.
If a vintage relume for functionality (cracking, peeling lume material), why would the rest of the watch show so little wear and no interior service markings? I guess if done for functional reasons it could explain why the hands were not redone and not everyone does a service mark of course.
If done recently I would expect to see the hands done too, and would expect better work quality to be honest. (They used proper material but didnt have the skills to properly apply it?)
OR...
Was it just an overloaded, worn down screen used on the printing of the dial? I have read multiple threads that say this happened sometimes but dont know if thats true or just wishful thinking.
I would like it to be that 👍 but wouldnt be asking the question if I knew and was unwilling to hear a different answer from someone who knows more than I.... and there are 3-4 specific members opinions I am really hoping for.
And now, the watch and some lume plots....
Thoughts appreciated. I think most of us have a thing or two to learn about lume and I dont mind being a learning point for all. Thanks OF!
