I looked up old redial threads and read back to about 2012 so I wouldn't ask idiotic questions, but I still have some newb questions....

In general, what makes a watch need a redial? What does this to a dial?



I have some nice and not so nice watches from mechanical through quartz/battery, and I've never had a watch do this. My Dad loved watches and collected what he could afford, and his watches never did this and he put his watches through a LOT. I could post a bigger image, but I think the point is made. Is this a result of exposure to water, neglect, lack of service, age? What can I do to avoid this from ever happening to anything I own?

When is it better to have a clean, well-done redial?

I understand a redial drops the value about 40% on average. Does changing the dial for another original dial in better condition change the value of a watch?

I apologize in advance for asking more questions once responses are received....

 

Not an expert on the subject but here are some of my thoughts, I'm sure more knowledgeable members will jump in and give more accurate answers.

I think there is no definite answer to your question(s), if a watch needs a redial or not depends on so many things
- is the dial completely damaged (water/corrosion) or just nicely aged (patina)
- what is the purpose/rarity/overall condition/etc. of the watch (collectible-> keep as original as possible) or just to have nice looking watch for everyday use (possible candidate for redial)

Completely damaged dials are usually result of accidents or complete misuse of the watch and/or lack of service (waterproof checking, fixing damaged crystal etc). At the other end it is then more difficult and also very subjective to define when normal aging of the dial is resulting a damaged dial or nice patina, also the reasons may vary. You can see posts saying that people have watches they have used everyday for years/decades and the dial is still almost as good as new where another watch has been in the box most of the time and dial is still looking very old.

Whether to have a dial restored or not is also very subjective, most purist will not tolerate any restoration, some collector maybe prefer a professionally made restoration or replacing the dial with an original part. In any case I believe it will drop the value of the watch.

 

So a lot of watches that look like the one in your example merely have aged lacquer - what was originally clear, smooth and even is now... less so. There is a huge difference between this sort of gentle aging and water damage. I'm in the group of collectors that love an absolutely pristine original dial, but also love this sort of watch that wears it's age on your sleeve. I'm assuming, during the course of your research that you found some of the watches referred to as Kyle L specials (a member who loves extreme patina). I bought one of Kyles watches (shown below, I need to take a more flattering photo but you get the idea) and I can honestly say its the favourite out of my whole collection.


If this look doesn't work for you, I suspect it's a period thing (as the lacquers change, so does the ageing) mostly from the fifties, and you can probably regard the process by limiting the dials exposure to light or humidity. There is a 'shiny shiny' crowd who would buy anything if it looked flawless, but personally, if I found out I'd bought a watch that had been repainted I'd immediately start looking for another example. If a dial is actually damaged rather than aged, a redial still wouldn't be an option for me as I just wouldn't want it.

Having said that all that, Dennis (ulackfocus) did a spectacular rescue of a jlc using the original factory dies (Dennis, it looks like the links to the story on watchtalkforum are broken - if you still have the content it might be worth posting here), but I think this is the exception for me that proves the rule...

An original, correct dial even if hunted down from a different watch, is the vastly preferred alternative , and unless you have hoi's contacts, probably cheaper too.

 

Me too!

 

Once personal preferences are of course just that! I think most collectors also will be going through phases where this focus will have varying emphasis.
I have had watches that have aged and is still lovely. Then there are the ones that have gone beyond. The definition of beyond is then a personal issue.
Personally I would draw a line at badly corroded dials.

 

Agreed, badly corroded dials as well as water damage are a turn off. Evidence of extensive water damage on a watch and I walk away every time as this usually leads to a corroded dial sooner or later.

 

Yes, I like all 3 of those watches. The patina does not detract imo, it's just a different look and I like it. But the picture I posted has something else going on - here's a bigger image. This is more than patina - to my untrained eye, this looks more like oxidation. Is this water damage? I would find this unacceptable, and even if given to me, don't think I'd wear it. As they say in the diamond world, I, and apparently some of you, have "mind clean" issues. You HAVE to be able to know that there's no hidden damages or else it diminshes the pleasure of the object, quickly.



KAMAK

Whether to have a dial restored or not is also very subjective, most purist will not tolerate any restoration, some collector maybe prefer a professionally made restoration or replacing the dial with an original part. In any case I believe it will drop the value of the watch.

I wouldn't want a redial and also think that it would diminish the value of a watch. But if one was able to find the exact same dial as the dial being replaced, who would ever know differently? It's not being replaced with an aftermarket or restored part - wouldn't the value be the same?

I've noticed that on some watches on ebay, the hands have some of the color worn away or the tips broken. How in the world does anyone scrape the paint of the hands???? Or damage the tips? I can't even conceive of any use I could put a watch to that would cause that!

 

Steve Wynn put his elbow straight through a... (think it was Picasso or a Barnett n. )

when this happened, he had already sold the painting to Stevie Cohen for $110 million.

Cohen pulled out of the deal. Wynn had the painting restored and repainted (covered by insurance). Long story boring: Wynn eventually sold the same restored painting to the same Steve Cohen for 140mm 9 months later.

My point: How come it's ok for fine art to be repainted / restored but not fine watches? I would love to be educated...

 

Only if you are Steve Wynn....

 

It's simple: once "original" is gone, you can't get it back again.

As Stuart / Mothra mentioned above, I have factory redials from JLC. Here's a before & after of my reference 2285:






I've also put NOS replacement dials on a watch with a bad redial:




In short, do whatever makes you happy since it's your money. Just be aware that an incorrect redial will kill the value of many watches to collectors. As nice as those JLC refinishing jobs are, I'd rather have a mint original. However, you'll get no complaints from me about the quality of Le Sentier's work. I have a Memovox that I'm toying around sending in for the same work.

 

That is a good question, for me it would be perfectly ok to replace a dial with exact the same dial as the original, even a factory redial/restoration is ok for me, but for some, only original is good enough. But as you mentioned, who would ever know, only the seller of course.

 

So, I guess watches are more like coins and less like fine art when it comes to value and originality. Coin collecting is unforgiving.

The difference between an uncirculated coin and a coin with a single scratch or nick can be factors of 10 or 100. Tough racket!

 

Sandy - to my eyes, and bearing in mind I can only see a small picture - the first watch you posted looked ok, if slightly unevenly aged and I think you'd sell for a test as much as a redialled version. Again, to me, your second watch has what I call dial warts, which I think is early water/humidity damage. I don't like these.

 

Yes, coin collecting is painful. There's a big difference between two BU/UNC coins: one with mint luster and patina, the other mechanically or chemically cleaned. The same story with banknotes.
However, with a NOS watch being the standard, how many owners can endure not to wear ? It can be frustrating.

Art is a different story and offers greater satisfaction (to the eye, or to the pocket) when the gamble pays off. The restorer and the restoration process can bring a fantastic contribution to the piece.
Here's a situation: http://www.reading.ac.uk/news-and-events/releases/PR537024.aspx

 

Do you think the watch collecting community would ever become accepting of professional restoration for the rarest examples ? For instance: a watch where there's only a few known pieces on the planet? Perhaps an early Rolex split second?? Dunno, maybe they do restore those "grail" pieces...

 

If properly redone, most of us "accept" restoration. But the market shows that watch collectors don't "prefer" it. Can't tell you what the future holds as more & more people get into watches.

 

The simple answer may be that with cars, art, etc., the quality of the restoration can be nearly identical to the original. Right now, most dial restos are like bad toupees - you can see them a mile away, and almost nobody likes them. When dial restoration rises to the level of high-end cars and fine art, the sentiment may change.

M'Bob

 

Mothra, the two pictures I posted are the same, I made the error of posting a small one for convenience, but then no one can see the detail of the damage. And these aren't mine, they're ebay pix.

Dennis, your JLC doesn't even look like the same watch!! Stunning improvement! May I ask what work like that would set someone back approximately? And that was done by factory? Knowing how much work like that runs could make a big difference in a buying decision of some older watches in less that great condition that one might find particularly attractive.

Rich, if a piece was rare or if I felt a strong affinity towards a watch, I'd be willing to accept restoration, but it all depends on the cost. It's a balancing of factors. If I found a gorgeous Patek that needed work for a great price, and I knew a restoration would be affordable as well, I might be willing to pull the trigger. But if the restoration would cost $2k, then I wouldn't be nearly as inclined, because knowing that I'm diminishing the "original" factor and I wouldn't be able to recoup my investment in the future, it would be more intelligent to buy a piece in better condition for slightly more. But again, it all depends on that nebulous love at first sight, gotta have it, never seen anything like it, won't stop thinking about it factor.

 

Sandy, your first photo is a Seamaster, the second a Geneve. They are most certainly not the same...

 

Yes, done at Le Sentier at a cost of just over $2200. The redial alone was $898.