Hi all,

There are many different varieties of lume that are considered acceptable. Some are more acceptable on some references than on others.

I'm curious to know your thoughts on the type of lume that "spreads" away from the painted markers.. It it legit? Is it common? Is it more appropriate on certain references than on others?

Here's an example, from a 105.003 dial



Comments welcome.

 

I would say that looks like a touch up gone wrong. I’ve seen slight migration but not like that. In my humble opinion

 

Is that a dial in your possession? Just from the photo, I'd guess that someone tried to consolidate lume that was coming away already and this is either the remnants of what had already disintegrated or spread from the compound/adhesive/varnish the restorer was using.

 

Agree, it looks like maybe someone tried cleaning the dial and the lume began to disintegrate or something

 

Hello @oddboy. Hope your well over there mate.

Now ,as you know, I know next to 'fakk all' about watches. But I do own a ,family owned, vintage 1965 Speedmaster that I know has not been touched up or interfered with in the last 50 years. The lume on my hour markers has spread. Is this preferable to lume that has been stabilised or re-touched?
Jonathan.

 

Jonathon, if you compare yours to the example above you'll see how yours has "bloomed", pushing out from one point on the marker to each side. The first example looks more like it's run in one direction. That's the difference between a natural spread over time or unintended blurring of the lines during conservation.

 

Ahhh... Yes I see! Thankyou. "Bloomed??? I like that description! It sounds like "a good thing".

 

"Bloom" is a term from making coffee. When you first add a little water to freshly ground coffee to displace the CO2, the grounds "bloom". Link to a video is below where you can clearly see it happening from the 2 minute mark onwards (but watch the whole thing cos it's just one of my favourite relaxation things) ... the word seemed appropriate to apply to the lume on your dial.

 

Yes, this dial is mine. I'll try to get better pics, as the spreading is in both direction, but more on one side than the other.

And this thread is less about this particular dial, and more about the spreading. Is it normal? Expected? Acceptable on some refs more than others?

 

Here's a Speedsonic that's doing something between spreading and blooming...

 

What is this? Lume particles coming loose (but why then still stick to the dial very close to the source as opposed to become dust which settles elsewhere)? Or is it the adhesive?

What causes this? Deterioration over many years of humidity-changes/hot-cold-hot-cold//tool-watch-mechanical-shock? Bad mix? Gravity?

Does the lume glow match the shape of the spreading?

There are three slightly different patterns here. There must be some elementary science involved. And some plausible theories...

The correct theory would be awesome.

 

Spreading lume, blooming lume, puffy lume - all subsets of the same thing, namely degrading and deteriorating lume. However, these euphemisms do seem to have gained traction. I wonder why?

 

Yes, it's all degradation. So too is the change in colour to those orangey brown hues we all love on vintage speedies.

The point of the question is more about what is original vs "adjusted" .

 

Here is my Mark III. I circled the ones in red that are "spreading" and the ones in blue that are not. While I could not picture it very well, the 9 o'clock lume most noticeable when the watch in in hand.

 

Killer blue dial!

 

I would say none of us are qualified to definitively say it's 'bloomed ' or its 'run'.
I don't feel that's a touch up job but that's just me.
Vintage does lots of differing things mostly not 'uniform' one things for sure nonnuffinblokes dial is doing its 'own thing' and that for me is vintage.

 

Looking at your pics, I think the lume was saturated with water, either in liquid form or vapor, and liquified the lume. I say that for a couple of reasons..

1. On each of the markers in question you will see that some of the paint of the actual marker is visible. It didnt come that way from the factory so the lume had to go somewhere. It liquified and pooled at the base of each marker.

2. Each "bloom" looks like a small puddle or pool of water. Lume doesnt just drift away, it got there from water getting into the case.

And since it is lume and not a stain (hopefully) there is a good chance it can be removed without damage.

 

Possibly the migrating lume is dust that has disconnected from the plot and is being held by static eclectricity to the nearby dial area. If this is so it can easily be brushed away. Beware touching the plots with the soft brush. I have a 2998.5 with no lume just white plots, so obviously the lume was brushed off at some point in its life.
I now have the dilema of deciding whether to relume with a suitable aged lume.

 

What would make the difference between references @oddboy? Is it to do with the type of luminous material used for a particular reference? For example: radium or tritium as opposed to luminova?

 

I don't know myself. That's why I was hoping to get some feedback. I tend to agree with comments above that mine may be affected in some way whereas yours is just ageing. I don't know what would cause either sort though.

Luminova I imagine wouldn't degrade in the same way. Both yours and mine should be tritium... I'd imagine different batches would age differently.