Vintage watches with “Patina”…
I have a couple vintage watches in my collection. However I find myself wanting more… say it at so, right!? Haha
Ok to my point of this discussion…
Vintage watches that have “patina” on the dial or hands… its just damage or corrosion… in my opinion, and a turnoff for me.
What does everyone here think?
Example: I purchased a ’99 Omega Seamaster second hand. The hands had debris on them and a piece fell to the dial. I contacted the broker and their customer service help me to return the watch to them to correct… but the watch maker stated its typical patina of a watch this age, and not to worry about it in the future. Umm what? We all have heard how even the smallest piece of dust or debris can cause issues with the movement. Plus I’m sure that Omega would have cleaned the hands or replaced them if they had serviced the watch...
A watch enthusiast whose always been into watches...but just in the last few years really dove into the deep end of collecting and research.
If a watch is old enough to buy a beer at a bar it is going to have imperfections. If the flaws impact its basic purpose it gets consigned to a drawer.
Many watch lovers are drawn to pieces because of the workmanship, materials, and precision that they embody. Vintage pieces lose all of these merits with time and wear.
Just about every watch I own is because something needs to replace my Omega while it is being repaired. Like with old cars, there is always a trade-off. Vintage is not everyone's thing.
I view patina as the natural changes in color when the materials are exposed to light over a long period of time. Corrosion usually comes from water being where it oughtn't be. I think that the watchmaker perhaps undersold the problem.
If a watch is old enough to buy a beer at a bar it is going to have imperfections. If the flaws impact its basic purpose it gets consigned to a drawer.
Many watch lovers are drawn to pieces because of the workmanship, materials, and precision that they embody. Vintage pieces lose all of these merits with time and wear.
Just about every watch I own is because something needs to replace my Omega while it is being repaired. Like with old cars, there is always a trade-off. Vintage is not everyone's thing.
I view patina as the natural changes in color when the materials are exposed to light over a long period of time. Corrosion usually comes from water being where it oughtn't be. I think that the watchmaker perhaps undersold the problem.
So I'm ok with fade on colors, but corrosion from moisture is definitely a no go for me. If a watch had water in it, rust on a dial isn't patina.. it's rust. I also think that a simple clean of the hands and dial makes sense to remove dust etc or contaminates that may cause discoloration or corrosion over time. I think you are right about the watch maker underselling the debris...I would have expected the hands to be cleaned when they did the complete service before selling, in the end they made it right.
@Aurelian hit the nail squarely on the head in terms of the difference between patina (potentially desirable) and corrosion (or any other damage). I've seen some watches where the patina does indeed add a lot of character and appeal, but others where I feel it detracts from the look. In no circumstances have I seen a watch where I would consider signs of age other than patina as adding to the appeal.
It depends if you are talking about patina or damage. The 1940 Movado in my profile pic has patina but no damage. When recently serviced (not easy to find a good watch repairer for the old stuff) I was offered a service to sort out the dial and ink in the numbers again. I refused as I prefer the dial as is (honest and original).
It depends if you are talking about patina or damage. The 1940 Movado in my profile pic has patina but no damage. When recently serviced (not easy to find a good watch repairer for the old stuff) I was offered a service to sort out the dial and ink in the numbers again. I refused as I prefer the dial as is (honest and original).
Yeah I think aged dials that do not have water/moisture damage are fine. I've seen some watches that have clearly been exposed to moisture or left sitting in the sun and are faded badly. Those don't get my attention as I see those as damaged. Dial that have corrosion spots or rust on indices I think are unacceptable... Some people love that though.
Oh Patina! That is the what most vintage dealer would say just to make you buy their rotting watches!
dont get me wrong, but patina is really in the eye of the beholder. to me, a watch can age gracefully, but if it has developed rust, mould and horrible corrosion, then it has aged rather terribly and I won’t pay good money for it.
patina has become as absurd as art auctions, it really has no clear referent point except for a group of buyers to hype it up. And there’s always a group of patina watch lovers and if it rocks their vintage boats, then I am happy for them.
Oh Patina! That is the what most vintage dealer would say just to make you buy their rotting watches!
dont get me wrong, but patina is really in the eye of the beholder. to me, a watch can age gracefully, but if it has developed rust, mould and horrible corrosion, then it has aged rather terribly and I won’t pay good money for it.
patina has become as absurd as art auctions, it really has no clear referent point except for a group of buyers to hype it up. And there’s always a group of patina watch lovers and if it rocks their vintage boats, then I am happy for them.
Yeah exactly... There is a watch dealer that sells vintage watches and straps... the watches are "untouched" in regards to finishing etc.. and I cant help but think... yeah you're just flipping damaged watches in some cases. If the hands have crud on them or the lume is falling apart or similar with the dial etc.. I get that some dials will discolor.. but if the dial has a rust stain from where the hands sat for years... thats damage not patina.. and I don't find it to be a positive selling point. I get that some people like that.. and to each their own, but maybe we should refer to them as heavily WORN or has slight damage to hands/dial etc.. and not patina'd.
I’ve never understood the word patina in the context of watches, I’ve Seen watches for sale and the seller has used the word to excuse dings, scratches, faded and disintegrated lume (a pet hate) and faded dial.
if I took a lump hammer to a vintage car and described it has having patina, expecting kudos, I would expect to be thrashed there and then.
I only like patina if it's MY patina, those battle scars and general wear and tear that have occurred during my ownership.
Patina is one thing, and fine within limits.
However, too often I see watches with moisture corrosion on hands and indexes (therefore also movement) or rotten dials, (so called tropical dials - who thought that scheme up?), being sold for very high prices (Rolex, anyone?) and I can only assume people have lost their minds....To each his own I guess.