Dear all.

As most know, the go-to crown for Constellations made in the fifties and sixties (for most references...) is the decagonal crown in its various sizes. Some advertising material shows Seamaster "clover" crowns used for early references, but it isn't proved that they were ever delivered like that (a shame, as I myself have a 2782 with a clover crown ). Later on, in the late sixties and forward, less characterfull, but more useful, crowns replaced the decagonal ones.


What I would like to know is - what about the scalloped crown seen on 14381 and 14393?




It's has a slim profile and is different from it's sibling, the lovely crown used on the earlier 30mm references in the 50's, which I've seen it confused with a few times:




Omega themselves have pictured the crown in marketing material, so IMO it is not a later service item. @mondodec's article on Constellation crowns mention it only passingly where it gets a mention as a "Seamaster type crown", which as can be seen above, isn't completely wrong. It is quite similar. Also, it is mentioned only in context with American-produced Constellations.

As far as my own observations are regarded, I have noticed that the crown is much, much more common on Constellations sold in the US than elsewhere. Conversely, I rarely - if ever - see decagonal crowns on 14381/14393 advertised by American sellers, or on watches which are known to originate from the US. The one I've pictured above is an August, 1961 US sold example). Somewhere along the lines (I haven't been able to dig up where, but it was probably here on OF) a consensus seems to have been made that the scalloped crown was a US only item - something I can well believe, both given the advert shown by Desmond and from my own observations. However, in a recent thread, @TNTwatch showed European marketing material showing the "US" crown!



This would indicate that either the European sellers used US advertising material or that the crowns were used in Europe as well - what are your thoughts?

I'd like to get some definite answers on this one, as I haven't yet seen anything to prove any of the theories - yet. I would love to see an extract or a sales receipt from a original Constellation from a European seller along a 14XXX with a scalloped crown*


Regards,
Troels.


Reference material:
https://omegaforums.net/threads/correct-crown-on-connie.45985/ (notice the difference in thickness on the scalloped ones - I believe only the slimmer ones are correct).
http://omega-constellation-collectors.blogspot.dk/2009/01/omega-constellation-crowning-glories.html (Desmond's reference article).
https://omegaforums.net/threads/difference-between-omega-14393-or-14381.53676/ (thread containing the EU advertising material).


* I realise that the crown could have been changed at some point, but if it really is an US-only item, why would an European watch maker have them in the first place?

 

As this 14393 was purchased by me from an American seller on fleaBay so it may have been originally sold in the US. 17xxx SN.


Sorry about the cat hair...

 

Great post @ConElPueblo
It would be good to put this 'vexatious' question into some kind of order
With regards old graphic adverts I tend to view them with some caution
As mentioned, Seamaster crowns were pictured (drawn) on some - so perhaps the 'European' adverts shown above were ones produced for the US but used locally for expediency ?

 

No idea about how the the adverts were produced, though I'd like to imagine some "Mad Men" ensamble crafting them, complete with smoke-filled rooms and empty whisky glasses on the tables

I don't put too much trust in drawn adverts, but at least they would have had to have some sort of model to draw, right?

 

I've never heard of a consensus of a US origin. The old ad posted was for a UK specific watch reference so guessing it's pictures may have originated from a US watch doesn't really make sense. The watch pictures also appear to be photographs rather than drawings.

The other ad I posted in the other thread was for the German market of a late 60s Constellation, so this is definitely not a US only crown at all.

FWIW, out of the 6 watches of this case style that I've had, only one was from the US but 4 of them have the scallop type crown and 1 decagonal. My impression is also that I've seen more of the scallop type than the other.

 

Also the Seamaster crown that Desmond mentioned on his site is the cover leaf style crown on the older constellations, not the scallop/cog-wheel style:



I also don't think there's any doubt that the scallop crown is period correct and originally equipped for some lyre lug Connies.

 

IMO, the crown on that specimen isn't the same - it is a wider version, not the slim variety. That could mean it was a replacement, but again - who knows? Or we may have up to three different, correct, crowns now
I have not seen the scalloped crown on the dog-leg 14900 to the same extent that I have seen it on the 14381/14393 and IMO it is, aesthetically, a less succesful pairing.

You mention that the scalloped crown is correct pre-1963 on 14XXX and this is where I admit not knowing how long time than model ran. Up to 1964?

I'd be vary of calling anything here definite, but it would be great to get "proof". The "US consensus" I speak of is evident when reading through the posts regarding the subject here. I am not saying that a vote was called and it was decided to refer to it in that way, only that the statement has been made a number of times and seems to have gotten a hold - I see how "consensus" could be misleading. Happy with that definition?

Re. the C-case, I find that particular one interesting. I don't recall seeing "Swiss" on the dial of an European Omega before? Isn't it usually "Swiss Made"?

Have you had an extract issued for any of them? That would be really interesting! Both regarding country of origin, but also of date of manufacture.

I too have seen more of the scalloped type on 143XX', but that could be down to how many where sold where, globally speaking.

 

The last advert you are picturing is the one I mention as a "Seamaster type crown". The quote is from page 4 in the article, the advert is overleaf.

 

I just saw that second mentioning after reading the pdf. They are not the same style at all.

 

...I am unsure of what you mean? That they are not of the Seamaster type? I agree.

 

The 2 mentionings are about 2 different crown styles. The first one, cover leaf, is more popular on late 50s Seamasters. The second, scallop, is not really exclusive to any style that I've seen.

They also don't fit the same cases.

 

The German C-case is a concrete proof of not US market exclusive, IMO. Swiss or Swiss Made is about the content of the product under Swiss laws, not about where the products are sold.

Any other reason you can think of that this is not a proof?

Repost:

 

This is the paragraph:



It mentions the "advertisement overleaf" and then calls that one a "Seamaster type crown".

This is the advertisement overlead:




I didn't write that it looked like a Seamaster crown, I am just quoting the text, hence the " ".

I really am unsure of what you are getting at.

 

The first mentioning of Seamaster crown is in the first screenshot I posted. Can you see the cover leaf crown? This is what I consider a proper Seamaster crown of the period.

 

For reference to add to the 'data base'
My 14381 SS dome dial has a decagonal crown
serial 1796xxx -which should place it pre-1963
Bought (by me) in the UK but don't know the country of first sale
My 14381 18k dome dial also has a decagonal crown
serial 1799xxx - which should also place it pre-1963
bought (by me) from Mexico but again don't know country of original sale
no OXG that I can see

 

I wasn't suggesting that any of the ads shown were not produced for specific countries (UK/Germany etc)
I was proposing that Omega may have commissioned the artwork for ads and used them globally

Difficult to be sure without the originals in-hand but given the stylised nature of the shading and reflections, all of these ads look like exquisitely drawn renders to me (which would have been the norm at the time for product advertisements)
the C-case ad is the one that most looks like a classically styled render of its era

This means they may be subject to 'artistic license' and so may not be totally accurate - hence the possible anomaly of just 'Swiss' on the C-case and indeed any of the crowns featured, such as the clover leaf crown on the Grande Luxe

-and just for clarity, I'm not saying they aren't correct - only that they may not be correct
would Omega allow such anomalies to be used in their advertising? -who knows, very possibly if they thought they looked good and attracted sales (and these expensive ad-campaign drawings may have been produced many months before actual product launch and continued to be used long afterwards)

now back to @ConElPueblo 's valiant quest for the truth about that pesky crown......

 

@TNTwatch - for us to keep on discussing this, I'll need you to understand that I am not trying to prove a specific point here. I don't care what is uncovered, just that some more data gets laid out. I have no bone in this discussion. Honestly. If

I never said that I considered the aforementioned crown a proper Seamaster crown - Desmond did in his article. I am really struggling here - why do you keep on talking about this?

Okay, since you ask for a yes/no answer: No, I don't consider that proof. Omega advertising from that era is riddled with errors of all sorts - go ask the Speedmaster guys! There are numerous examples of this.

I do not consider any sort of marketing material - be it produced by Omega themselves (to the extent that they ever did this - I don't know if they did, anyone?) or a second party - to be "proof". It's a pretty good indication of something, but I do not consider it proof.


I think that it is very telling that you've had numerous 14XXX' bought in Europe with the scalloped crown and the adverts are also good indicators of the use. I am certainly leaning towards it being a globally used item.

 

It may be possible in theory but very unlikely for many reasons.

I'm very familiar with photography and lighting and I'm 100% sure all the watch images in this thread so far are photographs, not drawings, due to the natural and small details on the subjects, the complicated lighting and reflections and the natural out-of-focus (bokeh) areas. I don't see any drawing artworks in there.

The Swiss on the C-case is very accurate actually - the gold bracelet was more than likely made outside of Switzerland and the whole watch therefore had to be, by laws, designated Swiss, and not Swiss Made.

The Grand Luxe wasn't a drawing artwork to begin with, in my judgement of the image. Even if it were an artwork, it had to be modelled after some real watch, not from the artist's imagination. And there are real life examples to prove that the advert wasn't just some imagination.

 

I'll bow to your greater knowledge of photography
But that C-case ad is a render
The shadows aren't correct
(Or at least the second hand was replaced with a shorter one after the photo was taken)