The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Including a photo of the piece you are talking about ALWAYS helps! You can learn how to post a photo here: How To Include Photos In Your Postings. 'For sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Links to Internet auctions are acceptable only if their purpose is to question the authenticity of a product or provide new clues for identifying counterfeit products. Links that appear to be 'shills' promoting the sale of counterfeit products will be deleted. Links to websites of sellers of counterfeit items are not permitted -- we know they are out there and do not need to be encouraging them by sending traffic to their sites. Privacy, additional policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
: But also realize you are looking at a photo
: that is around six-time life size. So of
: course the serial number you can't read
: looking at the actual watch is actually
: close to readable in such an enlarged photo!
: The serial number looks about right in size to
: me relative to the size of the lug.
I only own the one Seamaster (a GMT) and I agree that this may be a combination of the perspective and possibly that the location and size of the serial number on a SMP is different than on a GMT (since I'm not an expert), but I still believe the relative size of the serial number on the picture is different than the one on my watch. I base this on 2 observations:
1) The amount of relative space between the end of the serial number and the end of the lug compared to the lug size is smaller in the picture than on my watch; i.e., the serial number on my watch appears to take up significantly less space on the lug than the one on the picture. I admit, this may just be the perspective, or perhaps the case in the picture is for a mid-size model.
2) Also, the serial number on my watch is parallel to the curved edge, and slanted relative to the straight edge, whereas the number in the picture appears to be parllel to the flat edge and slanted relative to the curved edge. Again, this assumes the perspective of the picture has not distorted this, and that the serial number on all Omegas has the same slanting characteristic.
I'm not trying to quibble by any means... just trying to clarify my reasoning. I really appreciate this forum and the original Omega forum you run; all the discussions on fakes convinced me not to risk buying from anyone but an authorized dealer.
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |