Super post. And 'wot he said' to all of those who have emphasized the importance of communicating with the watchmaker. As the mechanical watch market has moved from primary users to collectors, authenticity has become a crucial aspect of things, but that has not been well- or broadly recognized among watchmakers. They still work by the old notion from the days when wristwatches were an ordinary accessory that people didn't give too much thought to - the principle of "get it working by hook or by crook" that has generated so many frankens over the years. Substituting pushers, crowns, hands is done from the box of spares and relume is applied with hardly a thought, because the customer just wants a working watch and isn't going to pay attention to such details anyway. Finding a watchmaker that is sensitive to matters of authenticity is like finding gold - although I believe and hope the market will encourage other talented individuals to develop such a sensibility.

None of which minimizes the importance of communication. One would certainly have been reasonable in expecting that an outfit like Austen Kaye would have its act together in this respect. About two years ago I sent a Gallet Excel-o-graph to a watchmaker quite well known in vintage circles. Beautiful intact creamy lume on the hands matching the lume of the markers going in, puke green fluorescent hands coming back, totally mismatched with the dial. And the watch was dead in my eyes. Even though the mechanical work had been done competently, he lost my business forever in that heartbeat when I opened the box. It never occurred to me that I would have to specify "don't touch the lovely lume." Now, the watchmaker I use for my challenging stuff ribs me about being a pain in the neck with lengthy instructions, but does what I ask, and when he believes I am wrong in what I am asking or disagrees, calls me to discuss it. I value that enormously.

In memoriam (before picture, of course):