-
Tired of adverts on RWI? - Subscribe by clicking HERE and PMing Trailboss for instructions and they will magically go away!
Brequet 553
- Thread starter donaldejose
- Start date
.JPG)
.JPG)
Yes, the hands of many Brequets are a dark blue.
Sorry my photos didn't show it well.
Much of the time they photograph black because of how the light hits them.
When the light strikes the hands to show the blue that light angle also tend to produce lots of glare on the dial and crystal.
How do you like these two photos?
Sorry my photos didn't show it well.
Much of the time they photograph black because of how the light hits them.
When the light strikes the hands to show the blue that light angle also tend to produce lots of glare on the dial and crystal.
How do you like these two photos?
I am always impressed with your photos!! And it is really good to have some unusual watches here.
And I too like the basic design of this watch.
But this is (I guess) a very cheap rep of a very expensive watch. And as such it will be very obvious that it is nothing other than a rep. Contrast that to the two tone Submariners you have shown us as well.
What happened to the guilleoche in the centre of the dial? It looks very blurred, almost non-existant. And the print could be sharper.
Even more so, the back is a no-go area. Don't take it off to show anyone who has ever seen a genuine Breguet. The gen versions have deep engravingings and beautiful movements with no stickers.
As to whether it is close to any Gen, I don't know. The number on the dial of a Gen is not a model number, but a serial number. And the model number on the back does not match any search I did. It might still exist though.
Anyhow I would not really care about the placement of the subdial or shape of minute hand. The main issue is if the watch is plausible as a Breguet, and on that score it fails due to lack of detailing.
In this case I would prefer the watch without the branding.
Given all this negativity from me, I hope you will read this in the spirit of freindly discussion and that you will continue to find that your watch is worth the money you paid for it.
After all you probably paid less than 1% of the Gen!!
And I too like the basic design of this watch.
But this is (I guess) a very cheap rep of a very expensive watch. And as such it will be very obvious that it is nothing other than a rep. Contrast that to the two tone Submariners you have shown us as well.
What happened to the guilleoche in the centre of the dial? It looks very blurred, almost non-existant. And the print could be sharper.
Even more so, the back is a no-go area. Don't take it off to show anyone who has ever seen a genuine Breguet. The gen versions have deep engravingings and beautiful movements with no stickers.
As to whether it is close to any Gen, I don't know. The number on the dial of a Gen is not a model number, but a serial number. And the model number on the back does not match any search I did. It might still exist though.
Anyhow I would not really care about the placement of the subdial or shape of minute hand. The main issue is if the watch is plausible as a Breguet, and on that score it fails due to lack of detailing.
In this case I would prefer the watch without the branding.
Given all this negativity from me, I hope you will read this in the spirit of freindly discussion and that you will continue to find that your watch is worth the money you paid for it.
After all you probably paid less than 1% of the Gen!!
mbjoer:
Good comments and good observations. You always notice more when looking at a blown up photo of the dial than you do looking at the dial itself 6 inches in front of your nose.
I have been getting tired of photographing stainless steel subs and their variations and tired of looking at them so I have deliberately been searching for more unusual watches to try to photograph well. I don't like every watch I photograph and don't try to photograph just watches I happen to like. I am not offended if most people don't like some of them either. I am just trying to take photographs worth looking at of some watches which are different than the ones so commonly seen here. I am trying to add some visual variety to the photos found here.
I do have some answers to your observations.
The guilleoche in the centre of the dial seems to fade because it is very shallow guilleoche all across the dial; not because the center is any different than the edge. Just too shallow (or protrudes too little) to show good shadow across the dial.
Probably due to a cheapness in manufacture. As you note, this is not a high quality piece of work.
Much better guilleoche work can be seen here:
and here:
The work on some reps is just better than the work on other reps.
Also, the back will never fool anyone. I suppose a see through back will alway be a bad idea when you are putting an inexpensive Chinese movement inside!
Finally, few people will even know what a Breguet watch is. The name will mean nothing to most people so in that context it could be a nice plain simple little watch to wear and enjoy. But I certainly would never try to pass it off as a true Breguet to anyone knowledgeable. In contrast, a BKLM/WM9 YM could be passed off as a gen to 99.99% of the public as long as they didn't open the case back.
I too feel this watch would work better if the Breguet name was not on it. Then it would be seen for the positive values it contains. Now it is seen as a "cheap rep."
Good comments and good observations. You always notice more when looking at a blown up photo of the dial than you do looking at the dial itself 6 inches in front of your nose.
I have been getting tired of photographing stainless steel subs and their variations and tired of looking at them so I have deliberately been searching for more unusual watches to try to photograph well. I don't like every watch I photograph and don't try to photograph just watches I happen to like. I am not offended if most people don't like some of them either. I am just trying to take photographs worth looking at of some watches which are different than the ones so commonly seen here. I am trying to add some visual variety to the photos found here.
I do have some answers to your observations.
The guilleoche in the centre of the dial seems to fade because it is very shallow guilleoche all across the dial; not because the center is any different than the edge. Just too shallow (or protrudes too little) to show good shadow across the dial.
Probably due to a cheapness in manufacture. As you note, this is not a high quality piece of work.
Much better guilleoche work can be seen here:
and here:
The work on some reps is just better than the work on other reps.
Also, the back will never fool anyone. I suppose a see through back will alway be a bad idea when you are putting an inexpensive Chinese movement inside!
Finally, few people will even know what a Breguet watch is. The name will mean nothing to most people so in that context it could be a nice plain simple little watch to wear and enjoy. But I certainly would never try to pass it off as a true Breguet to anyone knowledgeable. In contrast, a BKLM/WM9 YM could be passed off as a gen to 99.99% of the public as long as they didn't open the case back.
I too feel this watch would work better if the Breguet name was not on it. Then it would be seen for the positive values it contains. Now it is seen as a "cheap rep."
Pretty much agree to all that. To me plausibility is the second test to any rep (the first is functionality).
I do have one Breguet which I do rather like. It has it's faults as well but I love the dial and for that model the ST19 is a pretty close approximation to the Gen movement which is a Lemania.
Look at this:
I only wish I had your ability to take pictures. The colour play in the guilleoche is wonderful.
I do have one Breguet which I do rather like. It has it's faults as well but I love the dial and for that model the ST19 is a pretty close approximation to the Gen movement which is a Lemania.
Look at this:
I only wish I had your ability to take pictures. The colour play in the guilleoche is wonderful.
I like it very much and your photo is good.
I keep searching for simple "old fashioned" white dial watches with few complications.
To improve the light on a small object like a watch get or build a light box.
I take most of my photos in a light box with one flash off the camera to the side and with a white cardboard reflector to bounce fill flash into the watch.
Using a flash to the side is easy if your flash is able to connect to the camera with a cord that allows it to still use a TTL (through the lens) automatic exposure mode.
But the series of photos above were not taken in a light box; just with a flash to the side and a white reflector on the opposite side of the watch.
To improve composition, look for interesting backgrounds which will compliment the color tones in the watch/strap.
You can also photograph the watch on a white piece of paper so the watch seems to float, on a mirror so you get a reflection, on various types of fabric so you get a pattern in the background, on leather for texture, etc.
It is surprising how much a good background adds to the photo.
I keep searching for simple "old fashioned" white dial watches with few complications.
To improve the light on a small object like a watch get or build a light box.
I take most of my photos in a light box with one flash off the camera to the side and with a white cardboard reflector to bounce fill flash into the watch.
Using a flash to the side is easy if your flash is able to connect to the camera with a cord that allows it to still use a TTL (through the lens) automatic exposure mode.
But the series of photos above were not taken in a light box; just with a flash to the side and a white reflector on the opposite side of the watch.
To improve composition, look for interesting backgrounds which will compliment the color tones in the watch/strap.
You can also photograph the watch on a white piece of paper so the watch seems to float, on a mirror so you get a reflection, on various types of fabric so you get a pattern in the background, on leather for texture, etc.
It is surprising how much a good background adds to the photo.
Thanks for this.
I will have to start getting a bit more serious about my photography, and your advice is most welcome.
Only problem is time. I already spend far too much time on these fora......
I will have to start getting a bit more serious about my photography, and your advice is most welcome.
Only problem is time. I already spend far too much time on these fora......