- Posts
- 178
- Likes
- 293
Tiffany & Co
- Posts
- 18,244
- Likes
- 27,564
Foo2rama
··Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...No signs of a redial to me.
an extract will easily tell you.
an extract will easily tell you.
- Posts
- 18,244
- Likes
- 27,564
- Posts
- 1,060
- Likes
- 1,939
chipsotoole
·Looks at first glance ok, but check the thread about the S in Seamaster..it went through a lot of changes..this could be post "coat hanger" the hands suggest mid 60's ..other will know a bunch more.....be nice to see the movement, crown and caseback.
- Posts
- 314
- Likes
- 309
- Posts
- 178
- Likes
- 293
Robbyman
·Paid £350. Sounds ok?
- Posts
- 314
- Likes
- 309
- Posts
- 1,441
- Likes
- 3,809
killer67
·Is there a precedent for a SM with a Tiffany dial? I’m no expert so I was simply wondering
- Posts
- 24,595
- Likes
- 54,622
Dan S
·I agree that there's no obvious reason to think it's a re-dial. I have no idea whether "Tiffany & Co" is legit.
- Posts
- 13,435
- Likes
- 18,645
gatorcpa
··ΩF InvestiGatorIMO the dial is a total fabrication. The Omega font looks way off to me.
gatorcpa
gatorcpa
- Posts
- 55
- Likes
- 21
raitosan
·Unfortunately there is strong evidence that this watch is not authentic:
◾This OMEGA wordmark has serifs, whereas 1960s OMEGA wordmark forwfor Seamaster series was sans-serif.
◾M in OMEGA wordmark seems to be stretched to the right.
◾Assuming the watch is dated to 1960s, the Tiffany &Co. wordmark design is not at all consistent with that of the period-correct wordmark.
◾There is virtually no negative space to allow 'breathing room' between two wordmarks.
◾This OMEGA wordmark has serifs, whereas 1960s OMEGA wordmark forwfor Seamaster series was sans-serif.
◾M in OMEGA wordmark seems to be stretched to the right.
◾Assuming the watch is dated to 1960s, the Tiffany &Co. wordmark design is not at all consistent with that of the period-correct wordmark.
◾There is virtually no negative space to allow 'breathing room' between two wordmarks.
- Posts
- 365
- Likes
- 453
Maskelyne
·Some time ago I asked the T¨ürler company about Omega dials marked with their company name. The answer can be seen below. I doubt that Tiffany did print their company name as well. Besides that the print is not by Omega standards. In my humble opinion, it´s a sloppy redial.
- Posts
- 114
- Likes
- 211
earth38
·I believe that most Tiffany stamps were done by the retailer themselves. There may be different fonts, placements and some may be slightly slanted.
I believe that original post is a genuine stamp by Tiffany however an extract from Omega will defintely help to clarify the origin.
I believe that original post is a genuine stamp by Tiffany however an extract from Omega will defintely help to clarify the origin.
- Posts
- 1,672
- Likes
- 8,795
MikeMan2727
·Take a look at the movement. If it is not marked OXG, the Tiffany branding would not make sense.
I agree with @gatorcpa that the fonts look off.
Edit: It also looks like T Swiss Made T at 6 oclock with no sign of lume...
I agree with @gatorcpa that the fonts look off.
Edit: It also looks like T Swiss Made T at 6 oclock with no sign of lume...
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·I have seen quite a few of them in the NYC region over the years and they all seem to be about the same case style as the one pictured, both automatic and quartz versions, so to me I don't find it unusual. As suggested an archive inquiry would shed light on this watch.
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
- Posts
- 1,501
- Likes
- 5,694
KingCrouchy
·I'm fairly sure it is a newer model than that.
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·Why? To me this looks like a Ref.135005 with a Cal.600 or similar Seamasters from the 60s
I guessed later model as the case style resembles the 70's-80's seamasters I have handled.
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·
This is one of the seamaster styles we own that I was thinking of that's similar. I believe this is from 1979-1980.
- Posts
- 521
- Likes
- 789
OmegaP99
·I believe that most Tiffany stamps were done by the retailer themselves. There may be different fonts, placements and some may be slightly slanted.
I believe that original post is a genuine stamp by Tiffany however an extract from Omega will defintely help to clarify the origin.
I partially agree with this, I have found that Tiffany & Co. had the marks applied rather than the manufacturer, but I do not believe this particular example to be a genuine of-the-era Tiffany & Co. dial. It also doesn't seem like an original "Omega" text with a later addition of the "T&Co" mark, but rather a total redial. Try to get as many vintage Omegas in your hands as possible, pick up every one you can find at antique shops and watch sellers, and in time you can spot redials almost intuitively. If you're buying online that's not possible of course, but you will get an eye for it in time.
Original "OMEGA" font from this era is thin, delicate, and lovely. Never sloppy and I have never seen the fonts match so closely on a genuine T&Co dial where they appear to have been done at the same time. That dial doesn't look centered properly either and the outer track marks aren't aligned properly between the 12:00 and 1:00 indices.
