I'm a purist when it comes to watches. I appreciate seeing a watch in its original case, having the original movement, dial, hands and so forth. When I purchased this watch years past, I assumed the transfers were original to the piece. Knowing what I do now, I'm wondering if the transfers are not original.

Is there a way to tell whether the two transfers are old or new?

Comments? An educated guess?

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

What do YOU consider original. The watch almost certainly did not come from the factory this way (note how it partially obscures the company name). I think we all agree that the transfers put on dials by some recent eBay sellers is a travesty, but if the transfer was added by the first owner, is that original enough? The texture of the decals indicates they are printed (note the dot pattern) and I do not know how far back this process dates from. This looks like it could be vintage ornamentation, but I am not at all sure.

Hi Jerry T.,

I knew the transfers were not original to the dial from the factory. I was thinking perhaps they were put on during the time of the original ownership of watch. So in essence these transfers could be quite old.

I too agree transfers are a travesty to antique as well as vintage dials. Interesting point you made regarding the dot pattern of the transfers. Hopefully someone can find out how far back this process dates from. Thanks Jerry!

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

The application of photographic images to dials has been possible for a LONG time, but I don't think the "transfers" on the dial above are examples of the old type. I think those are relatively modern, as is indicated by their "dot" pattern, as well as their color.

The old images were essentially applied the same way images were applied to "tin-type" photographs, and all the originals I've seen have been black and white images. I don't know exactly how the process works, but it's a photographic process, and does not involve "printing" of any type.


BTW, this is just one more example of how we're allowing really good information to slip through our fingers. Most people would agree that 2 years isn't a very long period of time, and yet we're already losing access to information on our message boards that's only that old. One day, some of the people who posted such info will be gone, and if no attempt is made at preservation, the information will be lost forever. I keep thinking that's a terrible waste, but apparently it doesn't much concern anyone else.

=================

Steve Maddox
Past President, NAWCC Chapter #62
North Little Rock, Arkansas
IHC Charter Member 49

Hi Doc!

I appreciate your reply, but the issue I was addressing is a bit different from that which most people apparently perceive, and it's one we haven't yet encountered on the IHC system.

On the Message Boards, unless the system has recently changed (which I doubt), the "Search" feature will only search messages there that are less than 2 years old. Messages that are older than that fall beyond the limited scope of the "search," and while the topics still remain posted, they're inaccessible for most practical purposes.

I'm not aware of much (if any) information that's been recently deleted from the message board, but the information that's there doesn't do anyone any good if the "Search" function won't find it. Any person attempting to research a particular subject would have to manually look through years of old topics, and that obviously isn't practical. It'd be like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

I've attempted to explain this a number of times, apparently unsuccessfully, and I hope that eventually I'll be able to say it in a way that others will understand.

Information isn't of much benefit once there's no practical way to access it, and the limited scope of the "Search" feature on these message boards, essentially prevents access to topics that are more than 2 years old.

=============

SM

Steve,

Like Debbie I too believed you referred to missing material. You have my word that if there is a way to keep our search feature active we will find a way to do it. As Debbie said we take this very seriously and we are making the necessary investments to insure our long-term participation in the future of horology. As a part of that commitment we have every intention of compiling a lasting, fully available archive.

Fortunately, you raised these concerns while there is still time to prepare for them. I do remember having a discussion with one of our software designers very early-on about this sort of thing. The details are no longer clear in my mind but there was a time-frame default setting I had them modify at that time. Perhaps that is what Debbie referred to, but if further revisions are needed we'll do all we can.

We will be certain to bring this issue forward to our software people detailing your concerns in the coming weeks. If there are further adjustments or even re-writes needed count on everything being fully explored.

Lindell



[This message was edited by Lindell V. Riddle on January 18, 2004 at 2:11.]

Steve,

Thanks for the information you provided regarding the time frame of my transfers. I would be interested in reading additional information on the subject of transfers.

I enjoyed the neat ad you posted!

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

Stephanie -- You're very welcome.

Lindell -- Like you, I really hope something can be done to extend the search of our scope here when the time comes. Tom Chaudoir and I have nearly come to blows over this same issue, and in the past, he assured me there wasn't anything he could do about it. While that may be true, I'm not convinced there isn't something SOMEBODY can do, and in fact, a note Tom C. sent me about six months ago seemed to indicate that InfoPop was in the process of making some software changes that should allow more extensive searches.

It just kills me that SO MUCH good information is still posted on the old green board, but it's tantalizingly beyond anyone's realistic grasp at the moment. As things stand, that's essentially as bad as having it deleted, but there's yet hope that things will change in the future.

I agree that a lot of the stuff posted on the various message boards probably isn't worth preserving, but a lot of it is, and unless it's something that's just obviously off the topic (chat about football games, etc.), I'm an advocate for saving as much as possible.

==============

SM

UPDATE:

It appears as though things on the NAWCC Board have now changed, although exactly to what extent, I'm not absolutely certain.

If there are still limits for the "Search" feature, I think it would be useful to make people aware of those limits. As it's always been before, "Search" results might make it seem as though a particular topic has never been discussed, when in reality, it's just beyond the limited scope of the "Search." Of course, if the "Search" is actually going to "Search ALL Topics," as the selection implies, that's fairly self-explanatory, but if it's still limited in some way, that would be very helpful to know.

================

SM

Steve M.,

Unfortunately, none of the pictures could be accessed.

What is your educated guess of time-frame of transfers on my dial? You said relatively modern. 70's, 80's?

Also, on my dial it appears the letters EL (ELGIN) were printed over the transfer. Is that significant? Thanks

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

Stephanie,

You might want to look a little more closely at the "EL" area. Consider the image may have been scraped away at the "EL" to have the makers name come through.

The multiple images on your dial were not painted but rather applied which indicates to my mind they were not part of the original manufacturing process. The "dots" of course give them away. When they are part of the manufacturing process such depictions are tasteful and delicate. They would never interfere with timekeeping and like Jerry pointed out they would never be interfering with viewing the makers name. I must also point out the images of the young woman and the bird are two separate depictions and are no related to each other. Of course they were added later, just when I could not guess. Those dots are completely out of place as even ordinary decals would should have a finer texture. I agree with Steve the garish colors would make one think of them as recent additions. Sort of an "Early Ehrhardt" kind of thing.

Something like this may appeal to some whereas others would be asking how to remove them safely. I'd more than likely be doing some soaking of the dial. I just do not favor add-ons. By the way, what size watch is this?

For what it's worth, the old time items like Steve mentioned had a "sepia-tone" quality about them. They usually would usually be of an owner's wife or girlfriend. A man who had both would carry neither image I'll betcha!

Hope this helps.

Lindell

I don't know if this helps any, but I was watching a PBS program just yesterday about 'print media', and in that program they stated that dot matrix creation of printed material, whether on printed paper or transfers didn't not come into common practice until 1900. It was a tip for collectors who wanted to make a loose approximation on age of any printed materials when on antique shop searches. Using that source, that would mean your dial decal would be dated after 1900. Regards. Mark

NAWCC Member 157508
NAWCC-IHC Member 163

Hi Mark C.,
Thanks for the information regarding the dot matrix in that it came into play around 1900.

As Lindell said "those dots are completely out of place as even ordinary decals shall have a finer texture". I viewed dial transfers selling on ebay and I've not seen any dots matrix, but rather simply a finer texture.

When I looked more closely at the "EL" area on the lady and the bird dial, it seems the transfer was put on, then the "EL" was printed or painted over the transfer. On closer inspection, I noticed at the VIII hour, it is also painted over the transfer. Whereas, regarding the bird transfer, the decal is applied over the V hour obscuring the V.

Lindell, you asked the size.
6s, serial #9307154, 7j, 1901.

Any comments?

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979

The image below shows the center section of the dial of an 18s, 21j Longines "Express Monarch," private label marked for "Chas. S. Stifft & Co., Little Rock, Ark." The watch was purchased from the local estate of Dr. Daniel R. Hardeman (sp?), and its heavy 14k "BWCCo" case is ornately engraved with the initials "DRH" on the back, and the inscription: "Feb. 14, 1899" on the inside. I presume the people in the image must be the late Dr. Hardeman's father, aunt, and grandmother, and that Dr. Hardeman himself must have been a "II," or "III," etc., but that's really just an educated guess.

In any event, I feel it's fairly safe to presume that the image below is original, ca. 1899:

=================

SM

Steve M.,
A lovely dial indeed! I'll bet the case and movement are lovely as well.

Thanks Steve for sharing a truly historical timepiece.

Stephanie O'Neil
NAWCC Member 143979