One specific example: Kermit (probably extend that to any cartoon or puppetry character...)

Hope your mum recovered well. Those sundial are a very nice touch.

I'm glad the brand is getting some love. I was equally guilty. But prior to their GPHG win, I already noticed that actually some of their watches are pretty attractive. For example, the bold classically styles maestro with the modern tapering Roman numerals is actually quite an accomplished look, if conservative at heart. Another example, the TV-dial freelancer with open heart. And yes, I am not generally Iin favour of the needless open heart, but this is one exception of a watch I do like with it. Then came the Millesime, and that was a delight, especially in the genre of sector dials where I often prefer small seconds. Yet, in the small seconds version, the sundial feels a little cramped and that's down to typographical choices. Really they should st least have left automatic off the dial. It's very good as it is, but I the genre I thin kthe layout of the Longines is still preferable to me. Perhaps also because it makes no excuse for completely being a vintage remake. And then, I saw the rose gold centre seconds, and it just clicked. One of those instances where you actually instantaneously desire a watch. How strange, I thought, as I tend to prefer the small seconds subdial, but as I saw fault with it, the centre seconds resolved that. It also underlines the more contemporary lenience of the dial interpretation and the warmth of the gold with additional thinness makes that case really come into its own. The unusual step of adding drilled lugs stands out more on the gold and the silver gains additional depth thanks to the rose gold handset. Unexpectedly, Raymond Weil now has a place at the top (or close to, as really I'd expect some nice discounts a bit further on) of my priority list. The only thing against it is that it's not solid gold, so wear it too much, and the gold could wear off, as happened with my only gold plated watch before. This, however, would seem to be the almost uncanny perfect replacement for it. I'll stop my serenade now.

I love this photo. One for those horologically inclined. And why would grandma not be able to rock an explorer after all. It does suit her!

I own that same green Pitzmann II and it's been fantastic from the moment it was on the wrist. It's seriously impressive. If I had been into chronographs, I'd not hesitate about the 3. Since I'm not really, my hesitation about it is purely for that reason. I'm sure I'd enjoy it based on my II, it just is a very significant jump for someone who never truly has been into chronographs. It's funny that it took the 3 to deeper appreciate the II, but you're not wrong about it regardless.

I really appreciate seeing these to next to each other. I think even Peter Kotsa mentioned the 3 is built on the II's platform, but I now doubt that is wholly accurate and you'll be able to confirm. To me the lugs on the 3 look slimmer and less (if at all) flared out. Are there more notable differences about the case?

It's a great watch, especially this green. I do feel that for my taste, it overwhelms your wrist a bit.

I keep telling myself divers are not for me. I know this. And yet, every once in a while a dive-style watch comes by and it really makes me question myself. I find this actually looks really smart! The monochrome lends it something formal, while the multiple grooves and knurlings hark back to a 1960s vintage vibe, while also keeping touch with well-designed tools, like vintage cameras. I'm not sure exactly how to interpret the ancient calendar in there, but I do appreciate the reference to it. I've seen the Brave Beaters review and it really brought out the great design features this brings. I'm hoping to see some more footage of how it wears on the wrist.