Modest_Proposal
·It seems pretty clear to me he thinks the lume was originally on the dial:
Vujen: "Probably there were some without lume, and some others, like this, with lume. Same thing for every other UG ref."
Please consider donating to help offset our high running costs.
The answer lies beneath the surface of the lume, if any trace of what was beneath remains.
I would expect the answer, if found, would have a major impact on value. Not that that's going to happen.
What would you find under the lume and what would this tell you? I would expect under the current lume you just have the exact dial seen in the archival photo.
If we assume that there were lumed and non-lumed versions of this dial, are you suggesting that they started their lives out the same and then UG just painted over the printed numerals? I'm not familiar enough with dial manufacturing during that era.
Also, does anyone have examples of other UG dials with lume font as thin as the OP's watch?
If we assume that there were lumed and non-lumed versions of this dial, are you suggesting that they started their lives out the same and then UG just painted over the printed numerals? I'm not familiar enough with dial manufacturing during that era.
Also, does anyone have examples of other UG dials with lume font as thin as the OP's watch?
I don't have another thin lume example, but this situation does remind me a bit of this two tone Tri, which used to belong to @bimbim1207, where lume has been applied to the tear drop indices, and paired with lumed hands. I wouldn't be surprised to see a non lume version of this, with regular teardrop indices and stick or leaf hands. Who knows, maybe this was even a custom order.
It does not directly apply to the example in this thread except to show that I think UG was not afraid to get "creative" with their use of dial, hands, and lume. It's one of the things I love about UG. With few "fixed" models (except later), it does make verification more difficult.