closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 168

Thread: Restore vs keep original, To whom it may concern

  1. #1
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3

    Restore vs keep original, To whom it may concern

    Are you one of those who wonder why a vintage SEIKO is sold for half its expected value? Are you one of those who "restore" watches, either as a collector or as a watchmaker? Then this read might be for you.

    There is one aspect where the vintage Rolex collecting community has come farther than many other brand communities, and especially the SEIKO community.

    When buying a vintage Rolex the well versed collector knows originality is everything! Unpolished cases are of course very rare when it comes to Rolex but when it comes to dial and hands a relume will most likely destroy the value of a vintage Rolex Submariner.

    The collectors hunt for Rolex subs in great condition has made collectors and sellers world wide swap parts to combine a great "package" which greatly increases the value of the watch. These swaps are so common that case serial number needs to be checked to ensure that the dial variation matches the age of the case, the same goes for clasp code (if you are picky). If parts don't match, then down goes the value. This is common knowledge in the Rolex watch community. Same goes for cases, untouched is much preferred over refinished.

    In the vintage SEIKO community however, there are a few big players when it comes to restoring. I have no personal gain to bash any of them, I just call it as I see it, and that is that many of the watches going to USA (to the three lettered chop shop and the self proclaimed watch Jesus) returns relumed. There are of course reasons for replacing hands but I promise you that the serious collectors won't touch these relumed watches, "originality is everything".

    Some SEIKO collectors have of course not come to this conclusion yet, but given the price increases of vintage SEIKO watches for the past 2-3 years, I promise you, in 5 years, a relumed 6309/6306, 6105 and so on will be next to worth nothing compared to an all original half decent looking example.


    Let me give you an example of a watch I once owned.

    I bought this lovely 6105 but sadly it didn't have the original hand set.



    With help from a fellow TZUK member I sourced a perfectly matching correct handset which made for a great package.

    I then sold the watch and off it went to the watchmaker where it got a complete "restoration". The watchmaker even uploaded a video saying he relumed this watch with a "vintage super lume", so good he didn't usually do it since it was close to impossible to distinguish it from original lume.



    From my perspective it looks awful and this completely destroyed the history, the originality and the value of this watch. Not only did the watch get destroyed, the customer also payed a ridiculous amount of money and had to wait for a very long time to get the "restoration"
    done.

    So please, pretty please with suger on top, think very hard before you decide to relume the hands or dial on an all original vintage SEIKO even if it has patina, these "renovations" are messing up the SEIKO heritage. Even a good relume is worse than bad original lume, "originality is everything".

    As a community we need to unite before most of the vintage SEIKO offerings are destroyed by "restorations". Patina is not always a bad thing, it's a part of the watch which shouldn't be destroyed. The same goes for "case restoration", originality is everything.
    Last edited by yonsson; 11th August 2017 at 22:29.

  2. #2
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    365
    That lume job looks awful

  3. #3
    I have never quite understood the "let's buy vintage and then make it look like new" mentality.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  4. #4
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    1,971
    I agree but not going to say too much as I've been jumped all over for daring to suggest similar 'amazing' lume jobs are terrible.

    You'll no doubt find someone will tell you the lume would originally have been that grainy, two types of lume blah blah. Can you honestly imagine Seiko releasing lume looking that bad? Not gonna happen! and when you see real NOS dials, well..

  5. #5
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    16,144
    Completely agree, all original unrestored watches are a rarity these days.
    Cheers..
    Jase

  6. #6
    Master alfat33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    6,198
    It's surely true that sought after watches in unrestored condition are rare. For me, one attraction of less sought after 'everyday' watches is that they are so cheap that nobody would bother to restore them. Of course they aren't as desirable but I get a real kick out of finding something that may be run of the mill, but still well made as so many watches were, and in good enough condition to look recently made.

    @yonsson, I feel your pain seeing what happened to 'your' watch.

  7. #7
    Master Neilw3030's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Exeter, Devon, UK
    Posts
    4,046
    I reckon there is two sides here, yes of course some guys want an all original watch, untouched completely, but some guys want a watch to look as good as it can be, polished, brushed even re lumed.
    I for one have no interest in a well worn watch, one that looks like it's been around the block a few times, and that includes Rolex and whatever else.
    But I'm not going to rubbish anybody's choice, because it is their choice not mine after all.
    It's agreed originality is key to value, but not beat up, worn out originality.

  8. #8
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    5,128
    It's not a fact that restoration is 'bad'..it's simply a matter of fashion. A worn, 'original' watch doesn't much resemble the same watch when new. They didn't come from the factory with worn, scratched paint, rotting lume and knackered movement. You could say a well restored sample is more faithful,to the original state of the watch . Of how the designers and manufacturers, intended it to be.
    Actually, the whole 'vintage' movement is pretty authoritarian, yet has no more legitimacy than other views. All are just a matter of personal taste.
    Personally I wouldn't want some knackered old watch. It's a consumer durable, always intended to wear, degrade And slowly die.....now it's been turned into another way to milk the market.
    Do your own thing. If you want to restore, restore. Stuff fashion.
    Last edited by paskinner; 12th August 2017 at 08:15.

  9. #9
    Master alfat33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    6,198

    Restore vs keep original, To whom it may concern

    Fair points of course, but I think the OP's point was that his wasn't a 'knackered old watch', rather a lovely original watch in good condition, with the lume darkening at the edges due to age in a pleasing way (subjective opinion of course).

  10. #10
    Grand Master number2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North and South.
    Posts
    30,562
    Thought provoking post OP, many thanks, altered my view of older watches.
    Last edited by number2; 14th August 2017 at 05:56.
    "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."

    'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.

  11. #11
    Some watches age very nicely, but imo that one looked a bit gross in the 'before' shot, a bit like a Petri dish experiment.

  12. #12
    Master Bodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    1,147
    When people care more about perceived value than enjoyment of the watch they own.

  13. #13
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    1,971
    I think the poor job is a lot of the point here.

    Regardless of whether you feel it should stay original or not the re-lume there is bad. It could have been done perfect and smooth shaping but my hunch is someone tried to recreate Seiko's 'grainy lume' but tried a bit too hard.

    If done well I don't really have an issue with it. It needs to be done in keeping though. I've got watches that would look worse re-lumed as the dials & bezel inserts are battered and it would look really odd.

  14. #14
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    N.ireland
    Posts
    5,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodo View Post
    When people care more about perceived value than enjoyment of the watch they own.
    Bodo,can you clear in box please

  15. #15
    Master Bodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    1,147
    Sorry. Done! :)

  16. #16
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    1,971
    Double post

  17. #17
    Master Bodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by jameswrx View Post
    I think the poor job is a lot of the point here.

    Regardless of whether you feel it should stay original or not the re-lume there is bad. It could have been done perfect and smooth shaping but my hunch is someone tried to recreate Seiko's 'grainy lume' but tried a bit too hard.

    If done well I don't really have an issue with it. It needs to be done in keeping though. I've got watches that would look worse re-lumed as the dials & bezel inserts are battered and it would look really odd.

    Exactly right. Some old Seiko watches just, let's be honest, look pretty crap compared to some other vintage. If looked after then of course it will be best left as is. I think reluming a watch that doesn't need it to get it to glow is the only issue I have.

    The 1st gen 6105 that you sold and was subsequently relumed badly, suffered. It could have however been turned into a much nicer watch, and for me I would have paid more for it to look better over the sorry state it (the lume) was in.

    Here is a dial I just did actually. This is how it turned up, ignoring the markers but concentrate on the lume job.



    I removed the bad relume and then took some time to get it like this.



    So it is possible I think. And depending on the state of the original it can be a vast improvement. Or it can look terrible...

    Also,.the degradation of the lume can get worse and can also lead to corrosion of the lume plots, an aspect of yours that was in good condition. But if left, due to the type of lume used and the way it reacts with the plating of the markers, well your all original watch might just end up looking a lot worse of its own volition.
    Last edited by Bodo; 12th August 2017 at 09:56.

  18. #18
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodo View Post
    Exactly right. Some old Seiko watches just, let's be honest, look pretty crap compared to some other vintage. If looked after then of course it will be best left as is. I think reluming a watch that doesn't need it to get it to glow is the only issue I have.

    The 1st gen 6105 that you sold and was subsequently relumed badly, suffered. It could have however been turned into a much nicer watch, and for me I would have paid more for it to look better over the sorry state it (the lume) was in.

    Here is a dial I just did actually. This is how it turned up, ignoring the markers but concentrate on the lume job.



    I removed the bad relume and then took some time to get it like this.



    So it is possible I think. And depending on the state of the original it can be a vast improvement. Or it can look terrible...

    Also,.the degradation of the lume can get worse and can also lead to corrosion of the lume plots, an aspect of yours that was in good condition. But if left, due to the type of lume used and the way it reacts with the plating of the markers, well your all original watch might just end up looking a lot worse of its own volition.
    The originality is still destroyed, there is no going around that fact. Buying a relumed watch is not an option for me and I think most of the SEIKO community will agree with me eventually.

  19. #19
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3

    My previous 6159 is a good reference. No need to relume these hands. The only reason for relume is if the lume has fallen off.

  20. #20
    Master Bodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post
    The originality is still destroyed, there is no going around that fact. Buying a relumed watch is not an option for me and I think most of the SEIKO community will agree with me eventually.
    I wont, and that's what matters. :)

    I'll say this, of course I'd want an original watch when it comes to lume, but the lume has to look decent. I don't really care about owning a watch that every time I look at it I think 'oh, that's a mess' on top of 'ahh that's nice to own'. So I do see your point, but you're forgetting that a: sometimes a relume improves the watch, and b: of course people want originality but they also, I believe, want something that looks like it did when it was in top condition, well they wouldn't say no if that was an option put it that way. Seeing a beaten up 6105 or 6217 etc etc that could benefit from a restoration and in turn that pleases the owner, well that's a healthy thing. Whether I agree with how it was done or whether an aftermarket insert is used etc. And yobokies inserts are extremely good and many a watch can be benefit from it, especially when the insert on the watch was worn to hell and looks like it was scraped along the A1 for 20 miles.

    Regarding originality, where do you draw the line? Can we replace crystals with east tech / Spencer klein 1:1 reproductions? Can we swap rotating rings, can you tell if a rotating ring has been swapped, can you tell if a crystal has been swapped, what about the train bridge, or the mainplate of the movement? Mainsprings?

    I'm just playing devil's advocate a little, but it's because you went on a rant about knowing what the Seiko community wants, well, needs, when you should speak for yourself, really.

    The ship of Theseus springs to mind. Or Trigger's broom.

    Probably arguing for the sake of arguing but one of the things about the following that Seiko had as far as I can tell, was a love of their watches without being concerned about the price and what someone else would want.
    Last edited by Bodo; 12th August 2017 at 10:20.

  21. #21
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodo View Post
    I wont, and that's what matters. :)

    I'll say this, of course I'd want an original watch when it comes to lume, but the lume has to look decent. I don't really care about owning a watch that every time I look at it I think 'oh, that's a mess' on top of 'ahh that's nice to own'. So I do see your point, but you're forgetting that a: sometimes a relume improves the watch, and b: of course people want originality but they also, I believe, want something that looks like it did when it was in top condition, well they wouldn't say no if that was an option put it that way. Seeing a beaten up 6105 or 6217 etc etc that could benefit from a restoration and in turn that pleases the owner, well that's a healthy thing. Whether I agree with how it was done or whether an aftermarket insert is used etc. And yobokies inserts are extremely good and many a watch can be benefit from it, especially when the insert on the watch was worn to hell and looks like it was scraped along the A1 for 20 miles.

    Regarding originality, where do you draw the line? Can we replace crystals with east tech / Spencer klein 1:1 reproductions? Can we swap rotating rings, can you tell if a rotating ring has been swapped, can you tell if a crystal has been swapped, what about the train bridge, or the mainplate of the movement? Mainsprings?

    I'm just playing devil's advocate a little, but it's because you went on a rant about knowing what the Seiko community wants, well, needs, when you should speak for yourself, really.

    The ship of Theseus springs to mind. Or Trigger's broom.

    Probably arguing for the sake of arguing but one of the things about the following that Seiko had as far as I can tell, was a love of their watches without being concerned about the price and what someone else would want.
    You just proved why I consider this thread important enough to start. I don't speak for the entire community, I speak to the community. ;)

    Fixing something broke and replacing crystals is one thing, trying to fix patina is a completely different story. If the lume has fallen out, then by all means replace it, sourcing another set of hands or another bezel insert with original lume is however a better option.

  22. #22
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    132
    It's a terrible lume job, but that's an issue on its own.

    I can understand that some people prefer originality at all cost, but that's not me. I have no interest whatsoever in romanticising someone else's journey with a watch, and would prefer it to look in as good a condition as possible. If that involved a new dial, handset, crystal etc. for a ratty watch then so be it.

  23. #23
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    3,126
    The trouble is grimy mouldy lume like that in the OP post or on the hands above looks rubbish, yes aged lume is lovely but black corrosion or fungal growth really does not. The lume job shown originally is awful but the later one with looks better to me than the manky plots and hands. I too would get the first watch relumed but I would expect and require a much better job than that which resulted.

  24. #24
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Bedfordshire
    Posts
    706
    Sympathetic restoration.

  25. #25
    Well i think that honest repairs to improve a watch that is done to the same standards or better than factory is well worth it and i do agree that poor work does devalue any watch....but to say the original watch the op stated did not need some help with the lume is wrong.....leaving a beautiful watch with black spots on it takes away from it beauty....dont think i mean every watch needs all the lume removed and made to look new.....to the contrary....i think a old watch needs to look old...
    Any repairs u have done should be done to the highest level otherwise better to leave it alone...
    God Bless,John
    As someone who is from the Seiko community for many years and a new member here...and i can just speak from.my own experiences ....i love original watches but sometimes even.beautiful watches need a little help


    Sent from my LGL41C using Tapatalk

  26. #26
    I bought a very rarely found first Seiko 300m diver 6215-7000 In this condition. The insert was scruffy and the lume was falling out of the hour hand. I think you will agree I couldn't wear it like that. So I sent it to Duncan (TheWatchBloke). He fully serviced the movement, patched the lume on the hour hand, and fitted a Yobokies insert. Now it's not totally as found original, but it has received a new lease of life and is hopefully good for another 50 years:




  27. #27
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,412
    The most prized vintage watch is an original one that has aged beautifully. One that has aged badly on the other hand, may just need fixing. It won't have the value of the original one once it's fixed, but if it's aged badly it wouldn't have been worth much in its original state either.

    I can see the point of asking people not to destroy beautiful original watches that don't need fixing, but 'originality is everything' is too broad a slogan. Original water damage is not of much interest for instance!

  28. #28
    Master Thewatchbloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Oxfordshire UK
    Posts
    7,238
    I'm in the keep it original if at all possible camp, when talking about lume or dials I'd rather save what's survived than replace it. To me it doesn't matter if it's a valuable watch or not, if replacement manufactures parts are no longer available then conservation is the order of the day. Agreed if a dial is totally destroyed then reluming/refinishing may be the only way forward. However, taking Darrens Monaco as an example you could hardly call the dial in good condition but I wouldn't dream of touching it, anything that was done would just detract from what it represents, there is always beauty in faded elegance as far as I'm concerned



    (The picture above is Darrens)

  29. #29
    Fortunately the original lume on my 6215-7000 was very good. The dial was near perfect. It was only the hour hand that needed attention, and Duncan did a patch repair to keep the original lume. Only the insert had to be replaced.

    The problem with Seiko divers is often they get fungus and all kinds of life growing in the lume. This is particularly a problem with 62mas and 6105's. Sometimes the decision has to be made and you've just got to sacrifice originality and re-lume.

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim W View Post
    I bought a very rarely found first Seiko 300m diver 6215-7000 In this condition. The insert was scruffy and the lume was falling out of the hour hand. I think you will agree I couldn't wear it like that. So I sent it to Duncan (TheWatchBloke). He fully serviced the movement, patched the lume on the hour hand, and fitted a Yobokies insert. Now it's not totally as found original, but it has received a new lease of life and is hopefully good for another 50 years:



    Excellent work as always by Duncan....that is a real beauty and it looks like new again...

    Sent from my LGL41C using Tapatalk

  31. #31
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim W View Post
    Fortunately the original lume on my 6215-7000 was very good. The dial was near perfect. It was only the hour hand that needed attention, and Duncan did a patch repair to keep the original lume. Only the insert had to be replaced.

    The problem with Seiko divers is often they get fungus and all kinds of life growing in the lume. This is particularly a problem with 62mas and 6105's. Sometimes the decision has to be made and you've just got to sacrifice originality and re-lume.
    Should not have messed with that bezel insert imho.

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post
    Should not have messed with that bezel insert imho.
    Well i have to say i am surprised anyone would say that....you are wrong...Duncan's work has made that watch look like it deserves....i think anyone can see that

    Sent from my LGL41C using Tapatalk

  33. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post
    Should not have messed with that bezel insert imho.
    A scabby watch is a scabby watch.

    People seem to be influenced by value in their opinions about aesthetics. Some watches like vintage Rolex and a few old Seiko's fetch more money if they are original and have significant patina (damage) rather than having restored pristine parts. It is all fashion and value driven though. If they had had a mere fraction of that 'patina' when bought new they would have been rejected out of hand and sent back saying 'don't send me that piece of crap' or words to that effect.

    The aesthetics haven't changed over time, just the relative value. if restored watches of that ilk fetched more money people would be praising the work and the much netter look, opinions driven by value.

    Most old Seiko's are not collectable, have no particular kudos. If they have 'patina' nobody will praise them, they will just be old scabby watches that have picked up damage over time. A similar watch that is pretty pristine with a some replaced parts will look better, have greater value and because it is not one of the few collectables will draw praise for its looks.

    If I owned a fairly expensive watch that would be significantly devalued in the market by making it pristine, I wouldn't do it. Doesn't mean that it is not a scabby watch though.



    Mitch

  34. #34
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by jringo8769 View Post
    Well i have to say i am surprised anyone would say that....you are wrong...Duncan's work has made that watch look like it deserves....i think anyone can see that

    Sent from my LGL41C using Tapatalk
    Opinions may vary but you can clearly see it's not an original bezel inlay and the lume pip doesn't match the dial and hands. He should have relumed the original insert to the right color instead or left it alone .

  35. #35
    Totally agree with OP, and why I've never managed to find a 6105/6217/6159 etc etc I'd buy as everyone seems to instantly relume them.

    However you want to cut it, the 6215 shown is a Seiko by Duncan, not a Seiko by Seiko.

    IMHO.

  36. #36
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
    ...It is all fashion and value driven though....

    The aesthetics haven't changed over time, just the relative value.
    Really? I think it's fair to say that an old sub with a beautiful colour of lume and a faded bezel has very much changed aesthetically, and a good one can look beautiful, if you appreciate that kind of thing. If it's fashionable and valuable it's precisely because it's changed aesthetically, people don't just pretend to like these things because someone told them it was fashionable. Well, some may do, but they'd be completely missing the point.

  37. #37
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    1,971
    The value/fashion thing is interesting but I don't agree.

    Let's face it, in the example of the submariner (or any diver) it hasn't been out 'that' long in the grand scheme of horology so these watches have taken 30/40/50 years to look like they do now.

    The fact some of us like the look of an old Submariner with a ghosted bezel doesn't have anything to do with fashion! It's the fact they have evolved into these things of beauty that (to some people) look better than they did when they were new.

  38. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Itsguy View Post
    Really? I think it's fair to say that an old sub with a beautiful colour of lume and a faded bezel has very much changed aesthetically, and a good one can look beautiful, if you appreciate that kind of thing. If it's fashionable and valuable it's precisely because it's changed aesthetically, people don't just pretend to like these things because someone told them it was fashionable. Well, some may do, but they'd be completely missing the point.
    The lume doesn't work, the bezel has suffered uv damage. if the watch had arrived like that new it would have been rejected. Nobody would have said, I prefer the look of it. That is what I mean by the aesthetics not changing.

    If a maker replicates the aged lume and bezel look on a new watch, they are quite often slated. Why, if the aesthetics have been improved?

    Still about value perception. For a very small number of old watches this 'patina' increases value. For most old watches this type of damage does not increase value, does not make them desirable, the opposite in fact, so you don't get the same eulogy for a photo of some old, scabby, no name watch, with the same 'patina' change as one of the few that attract a premium.



    Mitch

  39. #39
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
    The lume doesn't work, the bezel has suffered uv damage. if the watch had arrived like that new it would have been rejected. Nobody would have said, I prefer the look of it. That is what I mean by the aesthetics not changing.
    I very much do prefer the look of it, and precisely because it's changed aesthetically. Of course in a brand new watch these things would be a manufacturing fault, but that's not the case, it's a decades old watch that's has aged gracefully and now has more character than something fresh from the shop.

    It's a strange and circular argument to say that people only like them because they are more valuable. Why are they more valuable then? The answer can't be the value. They like them because of the way they look, the story they tell, because they make a completely different statement to a brand new watch fresh from an airport shop. Because, frankly, they can look achingly cool, while brand new watches can look a bit naff.

    Probably better to just say you don't like vintage, rather than suggest that people who like vintage watches are pretending to like them because of fashion or value. No, they actually like them, and that's why they become fashionable and valuable! It's fine if you don't though, brand new things can also have an appeal of their own.
    Last edited by Itsguy; 12th August 2017 at 17:20.

  40. #40
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    South West, UK
    Posts
    2,245

    Restore vs keep original, To whom it may concern

    I still have the 6159 I bought from you. I wouldn't dream of having the hands relumed. However, I am still undecided on how attractive I find them.

    Do my solution has been to buy a set of NOS hands and when it needs a service I can make the decision then. And, if they are changed the original set is untouched.



  41. #41
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
    Still about value perception. For a very small number of old watches this 'patina' increases value. For most old watches this type of damage does not increase value, does not make them desirable, the opposite in fact, so you don't get the same eulogy for a photo of some old, scabby, no name watch, with the same 'patina' change as one of the few that attract a premium.

    Mitch
    I don't know where you have been for the last 10 years but that is a ridiculous statement. If it's not original, it's undesirable/cheap, this applies to all vintage watches. The only reason for the rule not to apply to all SEIKOs YET is because they are so cheap, just wait a few years.

    An original 6159 is now +£5000, you really think it will be an easy sell for +£5000 if it's not all original? Just wait till a 6105 is £2000, then the relumed ones will go for half. Check out the vintage prices on JLC, Rolex, and Heuer and you will see I'm right.

    Patina always trumps relume, always!

  42. #42
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodder View Post
    I still have the 6159 I bought from you. I wouldn't dream of having the hands relumed. However, I am still undecided on how attractive I find them.

    Do my solution has been to buy a set of NOS hands and when it needs a service I can make the decision then. And, if they are changed the original set is untouched.


    That's how to do it!

  43. #43
    Master Bodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    Posts
    1,147
    Mmmmm "patina"....

  44. #44
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,412
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post
    Patina always trumps relume, always!
    To be fair, attractive patina trumps re-lume. Maybe in value terms originality always wins, but if it gets to the point where you no longer want to wear the watch because it looks not attractively vintage, but old and busted, then what's the point in that? Maybe that's the time to sell it to someone who thinks originality is the only factor, regardless of appearance, and buy something actually wearable...

    It's particularly tricky with Seikos I'd imagine, as I've seen many a beautifully aged Rolex that's been treasured and well looked after, but countless Seikos that have clearly been worn to death and not maintained at all. If you search for early GS, most of them are a mess. Either they weren't all that water proof, or regular servicing to keep the seals in order was rare.
    Last edited by Itsguy; 12th August 2017 at 19:50.

  45. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post
    I don't know where you have been for the last 10 years but that is a ridiculous statement. If it's not original, it's undesirable/cheap, this applies to all vintage watches. The only reason for the rule not to apply to all SEIKOs YET is because they are so cheap, just wait a few years.

    An original 6159 is now +£5000, you really think it will be an easy sell for +£5000 if it's not all original? Just wait till a 6105 is £2000, then the relumed ones will go for half. Check out the vintage prices on JLC, Rolex, and Heuer and you will see I'm right.

    Patina always trumps relume, always!
    You are just confirming that these statements about leaving damage untouched are largely driven by value perception and judgements.

    The watches you quoted are old and unlike the vast majority of old watches command high prices. The vast majority of old Seiko's do not command high prices and will not be more valued in a damaged state.

    Take this Seiko, it is from the Eighties, does not have a great value, will never be highly valued.







    When I got it it had 'patina' (Brown damage) on the edges of the dial and on the case under the crystal. I dropped the movement out, cleaned everything up that I could get at. I would have to remove the crystal to fully complete the job but won't because it is not worth the trouble.

    Should I have left the visible 'patina'? Why would I want the watch to look more scabby than it needs to? I prefer the cleaner newer look.


    I got this old G Shock around the same time. Now this is collectable and a pristine one can go for £500 (expensive in old G Shock terms). The one I got was just full of 'patina'. G Shocks from this time are known for their dial inserts outgassing something over time, which accumulates on the crystal and other surfaces giving a 'milky' sort of appearance. The resin also oxidises over time browning it. Well I just set about removing this 'patina' (damage) and restored it to a nearly new condition.

















































































    So who would want to leave these watches as scabby for the sake of originality? Well only if they thought they would be worth a lot more in the market if they did, not because of their aesthetics.



    Mitch

  46. #46
    Master seffrican's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    2,471
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by yonsson View Post

    My previous 6159 is a good reference. No need to relume these hands. The only reason for relume is if the lume has fallen off.
    I gather it's attractive to you. To me, the appearance the lume on the hands simulates that of grimy mould far too effectively for me to enjoy looking at that.

  47. #47
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    3,126
    Those hands make me want to reach for the bathroom cleaner. Face facts, a relume or new hands or dial are preferable to black rising damp on your watch face.

  48. #48
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    5,712
    Blog Entries
    1
    Unless the watch is significant historically and worthy of preservation then why would you want an every day watch to look scabby?

    I think there is a current trend to value originality over appearance.

    This was my grandad's watch, the case was chipped so I had it replated, it now looks like it did when he wore it, he wouldn't have worn a scabby watch.

    Omega Seamaster - 1965


  49. #49
    Master yonsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden & yonsson.com
    Posts
    2,757
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
    You are just confirming that these statements about leaving damage untouched are largely driven by value perception and judgements.

    The watches you quoted are old and unlike the vast majority of old watches command high prices. The vast majority of old Seiko's do not command high prices and will not be more valued in a damaged state.

    Take this Seiko, it is from the Eighties, does not have a great value, will never be highly valued.
    When I got it it had 'patina' (Brown damage) on the edges of the dial and on the case under the crystal. I dropped the movement out, cleaned everything up that I could get at. I would have to remove the crystal to fully complete the job but won't because it is not worth the trouble.

    Should I have left the visible 'patina'? Why would I want the watch to look more scabby than it needs to? I prefer the cleaner newer look.
    I got this old G Shock around the same time. Now this is collectable and a pristine one can go for £500 (expensive in old G Shock terms). The one I got was just full of 'patina'. G Shocks from this time are known for their dial inserts outgassing something over time, which accumulates on the crystal and other surfaces giving a 'milky' sort of appearance. The resin also oxidises over time browning it. Well I just set about removing this 'patina' (damage) and restored it to a nearly new condition.
    So who would want to leave these watches as scabby for the sake of originality? Well only if they thought they would be worth a lot more in the market if they did, not because of their aesthetics

    Mitch
    I never said cleaning up something is a bad thing, mold isn't the goal, I never said that, originality is the goal. There is nothing wrong with replacing a badly moldy part with an original part in better condition. But if the choice is between mold and relume/AM parts, then mold is preferable. The problem with cleaning up dials and hands is that you risk removing/destroying the lume and/or the lacquer on the dial/indexes. I have never said "the more mold it has, the more valuable it will be". And the value is of course related to the general buyers attraction to the item, an original watch isn't more valued for no reason.

    I knew when writing this that all wouldn't agree with me, that's why I started the thread. Try starting the exact same thread on a vintage Rolex forum and all will agree with my point of view, I can guarantee it.

  50. #50
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    16,144
    They are only original once.
    Cheers..
    Jase

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information