I was shocked to hear that a watch specialist from a major website believes this watch to be refinished. What say you? I was under the impression that it was unquestionably original. .
Definitely not in my wheel house, but looking closely the "OMEGA" text is a bit sloppy, the some of the second marks on the seconds subdial look bad, and spacing/ number shapes for the date are not very uniform.
Tough call, but who cares? Your watch is likely 56 to 70 years old and looks great. I'd wear it and not worry about a possible refinish.
As a guess, whoever said that was a repaint thought it looked to good to be true. I think it looks too good to be fake.
I see what you're saying, but that would be one beautiful redial. I'm 50-50 but slightly leaning towards original. I'm certainly no expert but these are a favorite of mine and I have been following them for years. If a redial, I sure hope we can find out who did the work! I would be most interested in hearing what Mike @MSNWatch would have to say, I think he has about a hundred of these! He posted some pictures a while back but I can't seem to find them.
I say it's a redial based mainly on this. But who cares, I think it's beautiful and would gladly bear the stigma of a redial every minute of every hour of every day of the week and month and phase.
I'm solidly in the who cares camp, unless huge money was paid based on it being presented as being absolutely original.
I am not really upset about it, should it be true. It seems to me that maybe the signature could possibly have been touched up. To those who say that it is a redial or refinished - can you elaborate? Surely not the whole thing? Do you mean it has been touched up? I will try to post a crisper shot in due time.
Seconds subdial tick marks still stand out to me, especially between 20 and 30 range (I don't know about the orientation either; never seen one where '0' is not at 12 o'clock position, but I really have not seen many of these in my short time here.