Am I the only one finding this questionable? From Cars and Watches, no less.... http://www.chrono24.com/longines/calatrava-sector-dial-rare-vintage-mint--id5522389.htm
Agreed. And those numerals!!! Look at that 10 and that 8. They look like some school project. The Longines logo is executed quite perfectly though, kind of scary. PS -and the crown is incorrect for those watches.... a bit steep for $3000 at 32mm.
I vote a low-end redial. The 10 and that 8 look like I did them. The uneven inner ring. Compare the ring's proximity to the one o'clock marker then to the 7 o'clock marker. The outer track ran over the 7 and 9 o'clock markers like they were speed bumps in a school parking lot. Has the outer track slightly missed the 1 o'clock marker on the outside? What's going on with the track at 10 o'clock? Is it distortion from a mark on the crystal?
I still can't believe Cars and Watches are doing this. Again I think we must conclude a number of traders and auction houses have cynically decided to pass off redials as original dials, at best to not disclose them as refinished-- and that there are enough newbie buyers who can't tell the difference or won't even care.
Last summer one of the branches of a very high end and established dealer in Paris was offering a redialed UG chronograph without disclosing it as such. I had to examine it with a loupe myself, and when I told the guy "this thing is refinished", he pulled a face but didn't deny at all.
Seconds register is off center. Numeral hour markers are rough as well, not to mention the black baton at the 10 position. 8 screams redial.
i don't mind if a seller is honest about a redial or restoration. Sadly much of the public just sees a cool old shiny watch and dealers gotta pay the rent.
This is the seller's description (both on Chrono24 and their website which @noelekal linked): "The original white/silver sector style dial with applied indexes is simply stunning."
Completed his sentence for him... What is amazing is the "Longines". That's really pretty good or at least it looks so in comparison.
Could the reason that the LONGINES itself looks very sharp be that only the rest is refinished (since it also has the brass dial foot)? So a refinished original dial where they left the LONGINES part alone?
This is an interesting one. Dodgy printing seems to suggest that something is wrong. Comparing it to an original (image immediately below), it looks worse still. But the signature and sub-dial look familiar. They resemble those found on a different dial (two examples below). But these two dials, of another design, have white feet. And one is in pristine condition despite a weathered movement. Were all three refinished (or produced) by the same people? Why does just one (the OP's) have a brass dial foot then? At this point, all I can say is that ink/printing on top of raised indexes is almost surely incorrect.
Ergo, the dial is original but the applied numerals & indices have been messed with? EDIT: 8 and 10 look less bad from these angles