or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 3098  

post #46456 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

Always interesting to hear your take on fonts and design elements, Belli.

And while I really like the new RO Jumbo - and I think it does a lot of things right - it's one of the reasons I prefer the original:



That 7 satisfied.gif

(And I'm probably in the minority, but I also much prefer the white date wheel.)
 

I love the stylized 7 in the original RO.  It seems watches back then be it the RO or the or say a vintage Orange Hand Ex 2, Sub, GMT etc, had more stylized numerals (Love the open 6 on vintage Rolex watches).   Perhaps as much as it was a conscious decision to used very stylized numbers, it was also a sign of people's taste be it clothing, hair cuts, cars, or numerals on watches.

 

I think the original RO is a fantastic design, and the original Orange Hand Ex2 is a very cool watch.  As much as I like the original designs, I think it was the right choice for AP and Rolex not to offer exact replicas of their original RO or Ex2.  There is something special about having an original piece from the 1970's and something had to be done to distinguish the ultra rare vintage models from modern pieces.  Whether someone has cared for a vintage piece for decades or spends serious $$$$ to buy an original today, it would be a bit unfair to that person if for a fraction of the price for AP or Rolex (or other brands) to offer an exact replica of these now highly sought after rare watches.  So giving people something modern and close to the original, but changing details on them preserves what is special and distinct about the originals, while offering others an opportunity to sample a modern version at a more affordable price.  

post #46457 of 48312
I suspect the reason the fonts used in the 70's and earlier were more individual, even bespoke, was because computer aided design did not exist then. I remember working in a drawing office on a drawing board on paper (or acrylic) with a pen or pencil. If I go into our drawing office now there is not a pen to be seen and even final designs rarely make it to paper but are spirited around the world electronically.

Also I believe some of the most objectionable fonts including the knock-off that belligero despises we not even invented then.
post #46458 of 48312
Comic sans, anyone?
post #46459 of 48312
But on a more serious note, and this is not entirely new ground: what's a good example of a modern / current-production watch that is destined for "classic" status in 2050?

I mean, I love my (newish) Reverso, but it's hardly changed from JLC's initial design many decades ago.

In other words: where's the "future old money" right now?
post #46460 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
 


When I was in Denmark last year, I remember being in the lobby of the hotel starting to walk to the bar (with a waiting area between, so I was not very close at first) and I noticed the light coming in to the bar reflect off of a watch. The gentleman wearing it reached for his drink, and it became quite obvious it was a 15400. They are a beautiful watch for sure, but they call a lot of attention to themselves. Obviously what calls attention to it is also what makes it beautiful, not trying to say anything negative, just commenting on how easy they are to spot. His friend, who he was obscuring, was wearing a Rolex Smurf. I was bottom feeding with a Speedy.

I guess I don't get the whole "They call a lot of attention to themselves."  I can understand if you and Tried and True were saying they are more common than sport watches from PP and VC.

 

However, calling a lot of attention to themselves or having issues about the light reflecting off some guy"s watch.  What watch doesn't reflect light?  Almost any modern Rolex would reflect more light with PLCs and polished lugs.  But back to offerings of the Big Three - the 15400 has a polished edge around the bezel and some polished beveled edges on the case and bracelet but it is mostly brushed surfaces.  It has more brushed surfaces than a Nautilus (which has a thicker polished edge around its bezel, and large polished center links. The Overseas entire top surface of the bezel, case sides, lug sides, and beveled edges of the lugs and bracelet are polished as are the indentations forming the Maltese Cross shape in the bracelet.  I would think that a Nautilus or Overseas would reflect at least as much light.  

 

Calling attention to itself...sounds more like something an individual would do rather than an object, which is entirely possible.  I've seen very loud flashy guys who wear super large watches (not even particularly nice watches) occasionally sitting at bars in some hotels or restaurants jangling their watches on bracelets with too many links, and maybe some waitress who likes fashion watches may make a comment...but that is about the guy seeking attention not the watch.  

 

I always find it interesting to spot a nice watch on someone in the wild.   I would have thought most watch guys would be excited to see nice watches in the wild, but somehow now it seems like now its a negative if it can be spotted. :puzzled:

post #46461 of 48312
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

 

although I find the Maltese Cross design incorporation into the bracelet a bit too blingy.  Its just one step shy of wearing a Tshirt that says, "I'm wearing a Vacheron Constantin."

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
 

I guess I don't get the whole "They call a lot of attention to themselves."  I can understand if you and Tried and True were saying they are more common than sport watches from PP and VC.

 

However, calling a lot of attention to themselves or having issues about the light reflecting off some guy"s watch.  What watch doesn't reflect light?  Almost any modern Rolex would reflect more light with PLCs and polished lugs.  But back to offerings of the Big Three - the 15400 has a polished edge around the bezel and some polished beveled edges on the case and bracelet but it is mostly brushed surfaces.  It has more brushed surfaces than a Nautilus (which has a thicker polished edge around its bezel, and large polished center links. The Overseas entire top surface of the bezel, case sides, lug sides, and beveled edges of the lugs and bracelet are polished as are the indentations forming the Maltese Cross shape in the bracelet.  I would think that a Nautilus or Overseas would reflect at least as much light.  

 

Calling attention to itself...sounds more like something an individual would do rather than an object, which is entirely possible.  I've seen very loud flashy guys who wear super large watches (not even particularly nice watches) occasionally sitting at bars in some hotels or restaurants jangling their watches on bracelets with too many links, and maybe some waitress who likes fashion watches may make a comment...but that is about the guy seeking attention not the watch.  

 

I always find it interesting to spot a nice watch on someone in the wild.   I would have thought most watch guys would be excited to see nice watches in the wild, but somehow now it seems like now its a negative if it can be spotted. :puzzled:

 

The light caught the bezel and then bracelet, and it caught my eye, then it was immediately recognizable. It was a case where it was simply a more recognizable watch (more common and easy to spot at a distance, the white/silver dial 15400 is simply an easy catch) just like you say. I'm not saying it's a bad thing and I mentioned it because it was an experience that I had that touched (I thought humorously) on T&T's post that I also read to be more about brand/model recognition than anything else. I noticed because I do like seeing watches in the wild, like I said, I'm not trying to say anything negative (you didn't bold that portion). I've seen all three in the wild, and my eye is drawn the to the RO the quickest. That's just my experience, and it's likely due to it being a combination of a more immediately recognizable design and the light playing with the finish of the bezel and bracelet.

 

Honestly, I'm confused by what seems to be conflicting statements from you. The Overseas is like wearing a t-shirt saying I'm wearing a Vacheron yet wearing another easily identifiable watch that others can admire is just fine. To me there is a disconnect. If you simply don't enjoy the over branding from an aesthetic stand point, I suppose I get it, it's a very specific polarizing aesthetic. I also think it's fairly original, well executed, and beautiful; sometimes trying to create those things can be polarizing. Just seems like a double standard in your critique.

post #46462 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post

 

Honestly, I'm confused by what seems to be conflicting statements from you. The Overseas is like wearing a t-shirt saying I'm wearing a Vacheron yet wearing another easily identifiable watch that others can admire is just fine. To me there is a disconnect. If you simply don't enjoy the over branding from an aesthetic stand point, I suppose I get it, it's a very specific polarizing aesthetic. I also think it's fairly original, well executed, and beautiful; sometimes trying to create those things can be polarizing. Just seems like a double standard in your critique.

As I said, I get it if you guys say its more common, or easier to recognize, but "Drawing a lot of attention to itself?"  I just didn't get it.  It mostly seemed like a negative story, but if you say its not I'll go with that.

 

As for my statement about the T shirt, it is precisely due to its over branding from a design standpoint.  Its not that the watch is so blingy, its the bracelets incorporation of their symbol.  As I stated earlier "I find the Maltese Cross design incorporation into the bracelet a bit too blingy.  Its just one step shy of wearing a Tshirt that says, "I'm wearing a Vacheron Constantin."  I never said wearing an Overseas is the same as wearing a Tshirt saying I'm wearing a VC.  I just wish the bracelet were different, hence I hope there will be a redesign next year.   Cheers!

 

PS.  I'm not sure their idea was truly original.  Ebel cut their double E insignia in half and used it as a bracelet back in the late 1990s.  

 

 9330C41-3716_FXA.jpg 


Edited by Dino944 - 9/30/15 at 12:03pm
post #46463 of 48312
Please don't break the thread rule against saying anything not positive about the Royal Oak (or Patek).
post #46464 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

You're right!

WTF, CROWN?!

Come on - some one must have some nugget of trivia about why the 6 in the 26 isn't open. Dino? Surely?
post #46465 of 48312
Yeah, I thought at first maybe there was literally just less space available, whenever you stick it next to the "2".

But if that were the case, then why is the "open 9" version utilized for 29? (Credit again to Winot for catching it here).

Simply a quirk?

Truly an oversight, or conscious decision?

I suspect this is the type of issue that has been researched to death over at TRF, or other other such specialty sites.

But there's never a good Rolex nerd around when you need one smile.gif
post #46466 of 48312
FAKE
post #46467 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

Yeah, I thought at first maybe there was literally just less space available, whenever you stick it next to the "2".

But if that were the case, then why is the "open 9" version utilized for 29? (Credit again to Winot for catching it here).

Simply a quirk?

Truly an oversight, or conscious decision?

I suspect this is the type of issue that has been researched to death over at TRF, or other other such specialty sites.

But there's never a good Rolex nerd around when you need one smile.gif

It's just one of those quirks of a bespoke item such as expertly handmade lettering. I suspect it's a sprezzatura thing, but only the person who made it knows.
post #46468 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
 

As I said, I get it if you guys say its more common, or easier to recognize, but "Drawing a lot of attention to itself?"  I just didn't get it.  It mostly seemed like a negative story, but if you say its not I'll go with that.

 

As for my statement about the T shirt, it is precisely due to its over branding from a design standpoint.  Its not that the watch is so blingy, its the bracelets incorporation of their symbol.  As I stated earlier "I find the Maltese Cross design incorporation into the bracelet a bit too blingy.  Its just one step shy of wearing a Tshirt that says, "I'm wearing a Vacheron Constantin."  I never said wearing an Overseas is the same as wearing a Tshirt saying I'm wearing a VC.  I just wish the bracelet were different, hence I hope there will be a redesign next year.   Cheers!

 

PS.  I'm not sure their idea was truly original.  Ebel cut their double E insignia in half and used it as a bracelet back in the late 1990s.  

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 9330C41-3716_FXA.jpg 

 

 

So you don't think the watch is blingy, just the bracelet? I'm confused. Or is it just a semantics issue?

 

As far as negative or not, I suppose that's up to the reader; I don't see it as a negative so I don't read it that way, you do, and that's fair. I also don't think all polished surfaces are created equal. Some play with light more than others, at least in my experience in observing (and wearing) watches. I'm just pointing out my personal experiences with seeing these watches in the wild, if you see those as a negative, that's fine.

 

In fairness, I said fairly original to protect myself. I was surprised you did not have something handy in your first response given your extensive knowledge, but had to come back to edit it. I figured somewhere a watch had incorporated it's logo similarly at some point, though it would be a limited list given most logos would be difficult to incorporate. But between bezel and bracelet, I still think the Overseas current iteration is fairly original given VC's attempts to find it an identity through the years.

post #46469 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

So you don't think the watch is blingy, just the bracelet? I'm confused. Or is it just a semantics issue?

 

As far as negative or not, I suppose that's up to the reader; I don't see it as a negative so I don't read it that way, you do, and that's fair. I also don't think all polished surfaces are created equal. Some play with light more than others, at least in my experience in observing (and wearing) watches. I'm just pointing out my personal experiences with seeing these watches in the wild, if you see those as a negative, that's fine.

 

In fairness, I said fairly original to protect myself. I was surprised you did not have something handy in your first response given your extensive knowledge, but had to come back to edit it. I figured somewhere a watch had incorporated it's logo similarly at some point, though it would be a limited list given most logos would be difficult to incorporate. But between bezel and bracelet, I still think the Overseas current iteration is fairly original given VC's attempts to find it an identity through the years.

I liked the 1st gen Overseas quite a bit.  The current generation I don't really care for, but for me the main deal breaker is the bracelet.  For me that is a large part of the watch, as I don't really like sports watches such as the RO Nautilus, or the Overseas on straps.  I find the bracelet is too blingy and I don't like the logo incorporated into it.  To me it becomes too borderline advertising.  I really like VC a lot and have 2 of their dress watches.  So my issue with them isn't an AP bias vs. a VC dislike.  

 

I can accept that not all brushed or polished surfaces are equal.  Hey, even if you flat out don't like the design, I can understand that. 

 

I didn't have time to complete my response because our office was going out for lunch, so I had to edit it.  The Ebels, I had seen years ago.  A guy I worked with had one.  VC's work is more intricate but neither bracelet appeals to me.  

post #46470 of 48312
Can I also say how fugly those VCs from the 70s that Dino posted are - jeepers - looks like what you'd buy from Argos for £9.99.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)