/fa/ - Fashion

>>18081485
Bracelet, of course. The only reason to do moonshine gold is to flex, so why not go all the way. The only reason I don't get one is that the Rolex President Day-Date is still a 'perfect' watch by comparison, though I favour the vintage versions over the modern iteration. Finally, you could always get the rubber strap after.

>>18081487
I know. Watchbase is fucking awesome for what info they actually have. I don't like Selita movements; they're measurably inferior to ETA, so I avoid them like the plague. Doesn't help that Swatch Group prevents companies outside from using ETA now. If only I could still buy a Laco Flieger with a proper ETA again.

>>17886324
The parts however started appearing with the co-axials, not prior. The half-link that started the discussion on WUS all those years ago was for a PO cal. 8500. I know the modern bracelets suck...everyone knows that. But my watches are not modern.

>>17886331
It's one of the best pictures of a watch I ever took, so I've kept it. Also, sentimentality. It's a very popular model, so sometimes it'll come up in discussions and a pic is required. Don't you keep old pics, Anon?

>>17886338
Serious answer: my watches bring a smile to my face. I hope your watches do the same for you, Anon! Live for today, because you cannot guarantee the 'morrow'.

>>17852155
I know, I never put in the work to photograph well, and it's an old digital because I can't be bothered to use better tech.

It's okay, I know they're shit. But at least the watches are cool. What are you wearing tonight, Fren?

>>17818503
You can think about whatever you'd like, madam. It's a shame that your preconceptions are incorrect.

>>17818506
Chill man...I haven't been here in a long time. How are you? How's it running? I was in my local AD Rolex the other day...they've got inventory now. Things may be returning to pre-Covid times soon.

>>17818507
It'll always be cope, as this watch would likely be in a museum before being on my wrist.

>>17053857
I don't know if they still make them though...and Anon's new arrival should be celebrated!

>>17053860
Don't know about Anons, but I assume it's genuine. My full size was definitely gen. before I sold it. Why does the finishing bother you? It's a watch from the 90s....

Affordable Luxury Edition

This thread is about the appreciation of watches and their design, their history, and the engineering and materials that are required to make a functioning timepiece.

Guides:
> Poorfag guide: https://m.imgur.com/a/NFMXDuK
> Watch essentials 102: https://pastebin.com/Rc77hhXV
> Purchasing used watches: https://pastebin.com/f44aJKy2
> Purchasing straps: https://pastebin.com/SwRysprE

Should I buy this MVMT / DW / "minimalist" fashion watch?
> https://imgur.com/a/6CNO8

Should I buy this Armani / Michael Kors / mall watch?
> https://imgur.com/a/Sw1FsAn

"Suggest a watch for me."
> Your budget
> Watch type, e.g. dress, diver, pilot
> Movement, e.g. automatic, hand wound, quartz
> Desired features, e.g. water resistance, day/date, 2nd time zone
> Preferred strap option, e.g. leather, nylon, bracelet
> Wrist size or desired watch size

Previous Thread: >>15867595

>>15864823
Nice...how's it running?

>pic for the stainless stunner

>>15864825
Mechanical watches have been obsolete since the quartz revolution in the 70s. Wristwatches have been obsolete since the first smartphone. The sole function of wristwatches today is 1) jewelry, 2) art, and 3) wealth signaling.

>>15864826
Right now the market is heavily saturated with people trying to sell due to the economic downturn from Covid lockdowns. If you are a brick and mortar selling a watch with full box and papers, you can probably go for the average or a little higher than what you see on Chrono24, but if you're an individual selling privately, you have to downgrade your price around 15% or so. If you try to keep it high, no one will buy. Trading in is even worse, because the place you are trading in to has to make a profit both ways: they have to be assured they can sell the watch for a profit and they have to make a profit on the watch they're selling you. If you want to sell your watch, depending on what it is and what condition, Chrono24 would be better in this climate...just don't expect to get the median return.

>>15864828
Agreed, but remember that you're wearing the watch for you, not for others. Just wear what you love, and if you need to save up for it, then do so. There's lots of time.

>>15864847
None; I've been thinking of a Rolex Cellini Prince for a while, but then I found a Patek rectangular from the 1920s which is nicer....still haven't pulled the trigger though because the Roger Dubuis Much More is an excellent modern contender. Rolex can gain if you 1) buy a stainless steel sports model and 2) put it in a safe for 20 years.

>>15864879
No; condensation inside the watch indicates moisture, which usually means that you may have bigger problems than just the cold. Normally with modern watches you won't get condensation at all; if you do it's usually a sign of water ingress and the need to have it serviced ASAP.

>>15860155
Because I wear it, I don't wash it, and I don't pretty it up for pictures. Sunlight catches dust like you wouldn't believe.

Here...have the prettiest picture I ever took of the good ole 2531.80

>>15857871
If you're weighing saving for a house vs. buying a watch, then I'd say immediately to forget the watch and get the house ASAP. You can always buy a watch later on, and with the current trends in the secondary market as they are, you won't have difficulty in getting something nice in a year or two from now.

If you buy a house, the issue is usually determined most by the area; as long as you can find a place that is in an area that is desirable (to a moderate degree) then it's likely not to devalue unless a disaster hits. I'm not convinced that there will be a housing market collapse at all. There may be a dip, but a house that costs 1million in a good area will likely cost the same or more in 2 years. You're not going to see a devaluation to what housing prices were 20 years ago.

Pic related worked for me when I was in uni 20 years ago. But that's just me. lol That being said, I like gears and shit and it worked with my personality. Rule no. 1 of watches is 'wear what you love'. Anything else is a waste of time (see the pun?).

>>15857876
Women know the value of reputation though. I've told this story here before, but in short when I was at a house party in Amsterdam given by a friend of mine, I tried to be nice and polite to everyone because I was the visitor (the foreigner). I talked with everyone, made polite conversation, etc. Half-way through the night, this one girl all of a sudden was all over me, and for a moment I couldn't figure out why until I noticed she was eying the Seamaster I was wearing. I kid you not...her eyes kept on going to it and then back up to me. Yet she wasn't all over me when she stood at a distance earlier in the night as we talked across the counter. Maybe it wasn't the seamaster...but I really think it was. Women recognize expensive shit, and if they know Omega or Rolex, then the word can open legs. And doors.

>>15447662
I don't believe that for a second. Gold looks fine on everyone; the challenge is what leather strap colour you have. Rose gold is a challenge, as it introduces a red into the skin which an be a problem, but yellow gold is fine.

Do you have a specific interest in using a diver for a dinner watch, or is it just an option that came across and you like the design? Also, have you tried one on?

>I've worn the Seamaster with my tux numerous times, though to be honest one day I'll probably just pull the trigger on a Patrimony and be done with it...never gotten complaints though.

>>15436490
That is one of the ugliest pieces of shit I've ever seen, and I've seen ugly shit. Jesus fucking christ...

>>15436552
Depends on the watch. Both Omegas can be set once every 3 months with regular wear and be fine for the time (though the numerical date will have to be reset depending on short months and February). I've never worn the Seagull for more than a month, but that was fine. The Waltham is dead on if need be, but I haven't run it more than 3 weeks at a time. Never tested the other ones. The Seamaster was so good at one point that I could predict the first strike of Big Ben's chimes, must to the astonishment of friends (it used to be 21 seconds before the hour, but I don't know what it is now since the renovation).

>>15406042
Love it. That's one thing that Omega consistently gets right...their lume. Granted, if/when>>15406009 gets his Semenmaster, his lume will blow the shit out of ours if it still holds the charge.

How's the Master Chronometer working for you? Keeping good time? I've always been impressed by their testing requirements, but I haven't bought one yet.

>>15299711
If you're comparing battery service to mechanical watch service, then yes it will be higher. There shouldn't be a premium however for a watch that is mechanically wound over a watch that is wound automatically with a weight (and the movements of the wearer).

Regarding the watch; it 'looks' legit, but there are so many variations of the Geneve from that era that anything is possible. Are you going through a 'reputable' website, or not? If you have protection in case the watch is delivered not as described, then you're okay. If you don't, I wouldn't buy based on the principle of the matter. There are tonnes of watches in this era and pricerange...you don't want to lose a few hundred due to a lack of protection.

>>15143134
Until light asks that which if best left unsaid.

>>15094669
I do get it, I just don't see why you need to get your pantaloons in a Krueller.

You find Rolexe's business practices unethical. Fine. You don't want to associate yourself with the brand, no problem; they'll survive without you and not recognize the exclusion. You can definitely criticize them...I just don't see what the point is or what it will achieve. It's...a waste of energy, isn't it? Also, how did I insult you? (and do you have any idea where you are?)

>>15094676
Well, Basel has changed you know. The watchworld is in serious decline, and the alarm has been ringing for the past 3 years. Bottom line is that the only market that exists is the Chinese and some of the Arabs...that's about it. The Chinese money has at best another decade before it runs its course, and America's energy sector means that the Arab money is also not guaranteed forever. Then you have other problems too...aesthetic and design dead-ends and technological developments that threaten to make the lever escapement a thing of the past. The modern watch world is in danger Anon, and the people who go to Basel now do so for the most part to make their blogs and channels relevant.

>>15094680
Oh, I do so because it's a form of recreation. Sometimes you find Anons here who have very surprising depths of knowledge in specified areas. There's one Anon here who knows just about all there is to know about Accutrons and other Tuning Fork movements. There's another who used to post who was someone who knew Lemania 5100s like the back of his hand. und so wieter....

The bottom line is I enjoy talking in a forum without having to censor myself the way I would on a 'normal' watch forum. We can curse, we can argue, we can do all the things that skip the pleasantries of the modern world. I don't have to say, 'I respectfully disagree' or 'while I respect your opinion' or 'we'll agree to disagree'....none of that shit. Furthermore, if I'm wrong, Anons will call me out on it.

>>15090444
Why? It can look good on the right watch.

>>14909346
I have a Rotary watch that uses the standard Miyota automatic movement. It's near shit; it's always lost 22 seconds per day, and it's probably in need of a serious service. The way I see it, Miyota is good if you want a disposable mechanical watch. It'll keep time within reason, but unless you love the aesthetics of it, it won't be worth the cost of servicing it unless you service it yourself.

One other thing I didn't mention about 'in-house' regarding the marketing. What do watch manufacturers have as an advantage in terms of marketing? No one needs a watch, and if they do, they don't need a mechanical one that is finicky.

Expensive houses can talk about 'prestige/heritage/status', but that only goes so far. To get the plebs who want mechanical supremacy, then we hear about COSC and 'Certified Chronometer' and 'Superlative Chronometer' and 'Master Chronometer'. But to the plebs who are not sold on the name, there is the secret weapon; this movement was manufactured 'in-house', the implication being that watches that outsource their movements are automatically inferior...because reasons.

It's a trick, a ploy.

>>14844773
That's a nice watch! I'm sure your bro will appreciate it! It has everything one needs.

Regarding the terminology; I've been steeped in pocket watch history for the past few months, so forgive me for that.

One last thing before I forget; the movement is 23 jewels, but a few of them are diamond (!). At this time in history Waltham would use sapphire, ruby, and diamond depending on the purpose and of course the visual appeal. Fun.

>>14844775
You're right of course; my pics in truth have always been rather shitty, but it's because I don't have a light box, my hand shakes, and I can't be bothered setting up a tripod to post on /fa/. lol It's like 1990's era special effects...let your imagination fill in the gaps.

Pic related is the best pic I've ever taken, and it's not great but better than anything else I've got...lol

Beautiful Hamilton...is that a 910 I spy?

>>14738000
>rate
It depends on what you want them for, how often you'd wear them, what you do for work or hobby, etc.

As an example, if you swim a lot, the seamaster makes sense. If you dive, it definitely makes sense. If you don't go near water most of the time, it's unnecessary and the money could go towards something else.

The constellation is fine...but for what purpose? If a dress watch, why not go for the gold variant?

Speedy is excellent choice, though I prefer Cal. 321 (more pricey, but iconic).

Grand Seiko...I never liked the aesthetics personally, but I understand wanting to get at least one example of the technology. Maybe you should look for something more 'exciting' in the colours and design.

As for the digital....I still don't know why people like these things at all. But there we are...no comment.

>>14542264
>>14542265
I think it's cool if you wear the right clothes with it. It has a futuristic/offworld look to it. That being said, I personally do not like watches that remind me of early arthropods in daily life. How's it keeping time?

I'll wade into the respectful discussion about fakes. Having owned a fake or two, my thoughts are simple. The fake is for the look, the genuine is for your heart. It's that simple. A fake speedy is a fake to me no matter what, even though the Alpha version of the speedy 'looks' the part without a problem. Same with fake Daytonas and all the rest; they complete 'the look', and the performance of the watch itself is irrelevant.

That being said, I don't have a problem with fakes at all if people want to spend money on them knowing that they are fakes. If someone spends real money on a fake (i.e. selling a fake at the price of the genuine article) then I'd be the first to say that's wrong. But if the person knows they're buying a fake, then who really cares?

Finally, I don't judge people on what they wear, either watchwise or otherwise. I just them on their actions. Respectable people can be found wearing sandals and pjs....and many awful people can be found wearing suits.

>>14507982
A few things you need to know. I'm assuming 'Brosnan Era' refers to the mechanical Seamaster 300m which was powered by the Omega cal. 1120 (basically the ETA movement), since Brosnan wore the quartz version in Goldeneye.

Regarding the 1120:
1) It is chronometer certified (COSC), so after service it will hold somewhere between -4/+6 per day. When mine came back from servicing, it was dead on 0/0, but the 1120 is still susceptible to positional rate differences, so now I leave it dial up overnight to gain for the loss it takes on my wrist. I haven't had to set it in 3 months, and the only thing I have to do is advance the date on the 30-month days. The movement is a workhorse, and anyone can service it.

2) The bracelet is considered the most comfortable one Omega ever made. It doesn't pull hairs, it slides like ice, and it looks awesome if you haven't scratched the hell out of it. The only downside is that it doesn't really have an easy microadjustment system; everything is pinned, so the best thing to do is get it sized correctly at a dealer/independent.

3) It's instantly recognizable, aesthetically pleasing to some, and very easy to read. The lume is perfect (though the skeleton hands make it less useful at a distance). If you take it diving like I do, then it'll do the job without a problem; just make sure to service the gaskets every year to be sure you won't flood the watch.

Do a search on Chrono24 to get a rough idea of prices so you can know where in the ballpark your dealer is.

>>14262445
NICE CHOICE OP!

>>14169958
Unknown. The long-term issues of co-axial movements are still not tested, for obvious reasons. Considering that the servicing interval is essentially the same (realistically at least once every 10 years) and that positional variance will always be something with these movements because of their design limitations, in my view the difference is in what you want, what you need it for, and what you expect of its performance within your daily life.

My Seamaster uses the old Omega 1120 movement, which is an ETA in their chronometer rated version. It holds to 0/0 per day because it loses when on my wrist but gains the same if face up overnight. So, a perfect watch for me. But obviously if it were dial up all day, or on my wrist 24/7, there would be a change. In other words, it performs because I know how to take advantage of the variance to keep it in time.

Then again, I got it to dive with, so it serves my purposes. Most people with dive watches don't dive, so it's an aesthetic/social choice. I wouldn't trade my watch for anything though...too many things that I've been through with it.

You have to understand that once you get to +/- 4 seconds daily, then it's all the same in terms of performance. After that point, you then start to pay money for finishing, complications, overall aesthetics, materials, and exclusivity.

>>14142246
Well, I have never sold one of my watches...only given it to family members. But I'm at the point where I could easily and without concern purchase my grails...not all at once, of course, but it wasn't possible years ago.

And now that I can, I don't have the incentive anymore. But other Anons who've been here long enough have heard this before, so I won't repeat.

I was looking at Pocket Watches for the past week, intensive. I'd settled on a beautiful piece...I didn't pull the trigger because I wanted to wait and see if my feelings on it changed. And of course it did, this afternoon in fact. It became 'just another' of the many...and I know I'd never be able to make it 'mine' the way that my current daily wear is definitely mine.....It's really fucking weird.

But I like your approach...that it will 'be a dependable tool for someone else'. A good way to think of it.