This is just exquisite!!!!!!!!!

[GeoffD]

I've always been more of a "tool watch" guy, and before stumbling my way onto this forum I could never see the point of having a see through back on a watch. Contrasting stripes and coloured screws; never saw the point (sorry but it was the truth). I have now been absolutely converted.



This is a piece of art in platinum and if I ever had the nearly half a million dollars needed and if one of the 50 examples made became available, I would love to own one. Do you think it can be worn "inside out"?

[Gruntfuttock]

Hi,

I have made this point before but there are some that actively seem to dislike display backs on watches. I cannot understand why anyone would prefer to look at a boring steel case-back, when they could be looking at (even a plain) movement? The more expensive the watch, the more there is to see, but in most cases you'll never get the chance. :reindeer:

[swedeone3]

That is just plain gorgeous. I agree with the point of the display back over the normal, boring steel back cover. There are so many beautiful movements out there.

[swanbourne]

I suppose it depends whether you want to buy a watch or buy jewellery. I love to see decorated movements but how much does something like this add to the price?

Eddie

[abraxas]

.
The 'decoration' (is that the word?) on the Blancpain above does nothing for me.



I like my metal to look like metal and not like some 15th century bibelot. Extreme decoration existed on watches before they could tell time ... you will find that as the timekeeping improved the decorations lessened.



I much prefer this.

john

[Dave E]

I'm with John on this, extreme decoration leaves me cold, but I do like that Chopard!

[Neil.C]

Hi,

I have made this point before but there are some that actively seem to dislike display backs on watches. I cannot understand why anyone would prefer to look at a boring steel case-back, when they could be looking at (even a plain) movement? The more expensive the watch, the more there is to see, but in most cases you'll never get the chance. :reindeer:

I dislike them and you don't see the back anyway if you are wearing your watch the right way round. :lol:

...and as for display backs on Seiko 5's.. :roll:

I much prefer a tool like caseback than a glass window on my watches, you can always take off the back if you want to look at the movement, but we all know what they look like.



I prefer my Speedmasters to have a steel back even if a fancy one




Casebacks don't have to be boring.

Unless it's a Rolex. :lol: but I find the complete lack of markings on the caseback comforting.



I'd rather look at this than what is inside.



Display backs to me just look effete and slightly gay. :lol: :wink:

[GeoffD]

In the main. I agree with Eddie - "I suppose it depends whether you want to buy a watch or buy jewellery."
This is where the difference in point of view comes in. To me this is first and foremost a beautifull piece of engravers art. Art first, jewellery second, watch third.
The fact that it has been achieved within the constraints applied by the requirements of a working watch movement just make me more in awe of the craftsmanship seen here. But, my appreciation is of the skill involved in producing this 3 dimensional piece of art that has real beauty to me anyway.

I should think most of the members here have a real appreciation of the precision engineering required by a good mechanical movement in a watch, hence the general preference for mechanical movements over quartz. Applying a level of finishing to these above and beyond that which is required for efficient working is a different matter. If it was the application of say a coating of Titanium Nitride, that in addition to improving the smooth running and wear resistance on machined gears also imparts an attractive satin gold finish, then it has a purpose. Geneva stripes and coloured screws obviously appeal to many, but not I'm afraid to me.
The Blancpain movement however instantly appealed to me - as a piece of 3 dimensional art, not just a decorative finish. Oh well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. :lol:
Should I put on my asbestos suit now ready for the flames?
[edited to allow for posts made whilst first typing this]

[swedeone3]

This is where we have a difference in point of view. To me this is first and foremost a beautifull piece of engravers art.
The fact that it has been achieved within the constraints applied by the requirements of a working watch movement just make me more in awe of the craftsmanship seen here. But, my appreciation is of the skill involved in producing this 3 dimensional piece of art that has real beauty to me anyway.

I should think most of the members here have a real appreciation of the precision engineering required by a good mechanical movement in a watch, hence the general preference for mechanical movements over quartz. Applying a level of finishing to these above and beyond that which is required for efficient working is a different matter. If it was the application of say a coating of Titanium Nitride, that in addition to improving the smooth running and wear resistance on machined gears also imparts an attractive satin gold finish, then it has a purpose. Geneva stripes and coloured screws obviously appeal to many, but not I'm afraid to me.
The Blancpain movement however instantly appealed to me - as a piece of 3 dimensional art, not just a decorative finish. Oh well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. :lol:
Should I put on my asbestos suit now ready for the flames?

:lol: You can always borrow one of my closet full if you need another Geoff. :D

To each their own... as with anything else. I am with you on this one and absolutely love a beautiful display back. Now if it adds significantly to the cost, well, that obviously has to be weighed.

[Kamraj]

Geoff, re

This is where we have a difference in point of view. To me this is first and foremost a beautifull piece of engravers art.
The fact that it has been achieved within the constraints applied by the requirements of a working watch movement just make me more in awe of the craftsmanship seen here. But, my appreciation is of the skill involved in producing this 3 dimensional piece of art that has real beauty to me anyway.

I should think most of the members here have a real appreciation of the precision engineering required by a good mechanical movement in a watch, hence the general preference for mechanical movements over quartz. Applying a level of finishing to these above and beyond that which is required for efficient working is a different matter. If it was the application of say a coating of Titanium Nitride, that in addition to improving the smooth running and wear resistance on machined gears also imparts an attractive satin gold finish, then it has a purpose. Geneva stripes and coloured screws obviously appeal to many, but not I'm afraid to me.
The Blancpain movement however instantly appealed to me - as a piece of 3 dimensional art, not just a decorative finish. Oh well, as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Should I put on my asbestos suit now ready for the flames?

I don't think anyone here is likely to disagree with you that a nicely decorated movement is a work of art, or that mechanical movements are nicer than quartz ones: the question is whether or not it's necessary to have a view back. Many people (I am one) think it sufficient to know that there's a complex little engine doing its thing within a steel case, without seeing it go about its business.

It's just a question of taste, to me viewbacks look fragile: I know they're no more fragile than the face crystal, but still, there's a psychological reassurance that the dial is there (and yes, I know the dial serves little or no protective purpose, but I still wouldn't be keen on a skeleton dial). Anyway, this whole tool-watch cult is inherently daft, as we seek out mechanical watches supposedly designed to go the ends of the earth, endure all things, resist even more things, und so weiter, knowing that (a) any decent quartz watch will do the same or better for far less money; (b) we wouldn't dare take these mechanical beauties to the ends of the earth etc etc etc even if we could be coaxed from our desks; (c) we have quartz beaters in the drawer against the unlikely event of (b). In that context, hoping that any of us (or you for that matter) have a sane and balanced view of anything watch-related is rather ... optimistic?

Help, I think I'm turning into Pottinger ...

Kamraj

[swedeone3]

So Geoff.... whata ya think of this one then?



:)

[Mrcrowley]

Here's mine with see through back



and here's the front :D

[S.L]

They can be fascinating to look at but not really for me, here's a few of the nicer one's I've seen IRL,





















/Stefan

[NJHawkins]

I just like seeing the "works". It's somehow reassuring to see how things work in these days when there is so much marketing trying to hide how little fantastic new product X does.

Skeleton watches don't really "do it" for me though as they are usually very hard to tell the time with.

Nick H.

[ralphy]

Here's mine with see through back



and here's the front :D

Paul
What is that, please?
R

[Dave E]

I much prefer a solid back to a display back, but don't mind if there is a display. I've got 4 watches with display backs, 2 of which are 2824 (both Stowa), so nothing desperately pretty, an Oris (base calibre 2836 plus red rotor) and a Glycine (a 2893). I'm vaguely interested in looking at them, but they aren't especially decorated.

[rfrazier]

.
The 'decoration' (is that the word?) on the Blancpain above does nothing for me.



I like my metal to look like metal and not like some 15th century bibelot. Extreme decoration existed on watches before they could tell time ... you will find that as the timekeeping improved the decorations lessened.



I much prefer this.

john

All that engraving of letters, etc., on the movement and on the case is decoration, just a different kind of decoration. I think I would rather have some squiggles on the case than all that "100m/330ft LUCSPORT No ...." stuff. It is just a varient of the "Super-Duper Turbo Charged" signs on cars. It is all decoration. But, fair enough.

Best wishes,
Bob

PS They really ought to have had a full stop after the "C" on the case. ;)
RLF

[abraxas]

Great thread guys but I haven't got the time to plough through it at the mo ... in the meantime you can feast on the best solid back I know (that's the way I like them - lots of writing that I understand not ... like hieroglyphics) and catch you laters.

john

[Gruntfuttock]

I suppose it depends whether you want to buy a watch or buy jewellery. I love to see decorated movements but how much does something like this add to the price?

Eddie

At the sort of prices paid by many a forum member for their watches, virtually no-one is just buying a watch. Status, exclusivity, brand name, bling etc is what you're buying.

With regard to pricing, the decoration is used to justify the price. The ex-factory cost of a decorated movement will still remain a tiny percentage of the shop price.

The price issue is a somewhat moot point because on many a watch, some decoration is done then they slap a stainless back on the watch. You only get to see the decoration in the sales blurb. It adds nothing to the watch in terms of accuracy or reliability, it just justifies the price tag. There is no undecorated version to buy, so no opportunity to vote with your wallet.

[Crusader]

I am with Neil on this one.

Also, a glassback wrecks a superior antimagnetic rating. :wink:

[Crusader]

PS They really ought to have had a full stop after the "C" on the case. ;)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sharp eye, Bob. Embarassing for the casemaker, given the price-point, isn't it?

[abraxas]

PS They really ought to have had a full stop after the "C" on the case. ;)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sharp eye, Bob. Embarassing for the casemaker, given the price-point, isn't it?

You are both wrong :P ... it's an L.U. of C and not an L.U.C. which it's a different marking. The company is called L.U. Chopard ... and L.U.C. refers to the movement caliber.

For example there is model called L.U.C 1860 and the one above is an L.U.C SPORT.

john

[rfrazier]

PS They really ought to have had a full stop after the "C" on the case. ;)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sharp eye, Bob. Embarassing for the casemaker, given the price-point, isn't it?

You are both wrong :P ... it's an L.U. of C and not an L.U.C. which it's a different marking. The company is called L.U. Chopard ... and L.U.C. refers to the movement caliber.

For example there is model called L.U.C 1860 and the one above is an L.U.C SPORT.

john

I though about that possibility when I saw it. It is even worse if intentional. They abbreviate something with "L." and "U." (Louis-Ulysse). The full stop tells us it is an abbreviation. Then when they name the movement they call it "L.U.C 1.96" really abbreviating "Chopard" with a "C", but they don't use a full stop. Silly.

Best wishes,
Bob

[Tinker]

PS They really ought to have had a full stop after the "C" on the case. ;)

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Sharp eye, Bob. Embarassing for the casemaker, given the price-point, isn't it?

Probably economising. The 4.96 is, after all, the lowest of their levels of decoration.

[Tinker]

So Geoff.... whata ya think of this one then?

:)

Ah, the joys of spark erosion and stamping. (Or stamping and then spark erosion.)

[Crusader]

I though about that possibility when I saw it. It is even worse if intentional. They abbreviate something with "L." and "U." (Louis-Ulysse). The full stop tells us it is an abbreviation. Then when they name the movement they call it "L.U.C 1.96" really abbreviating "Chopard" with a "C", but they don't use a full stop. Silly.

That is my take, too. If using initials as abbreviations (a subform of "suspension" rather than a "contraction", as far as abbreviating systems go, if memory serves), you either must give period marks to all (popular in the US), or none (popular in the UK), but you cannot mix.

Of course, the question whether a single sound expressed in two letters like "Ch" (or Ph, th etc.) can be abbreviated to a single letter in good conscience is another point that deserves ample debate. :P :D 8) Personally, if a sound was a single letter in Greek (ph) or Germanic languages (th), I think they should not abbreviated merely as "P" or "T", period mark or not. :roll: :lol: :wink:

[GeoffD]

So Geoff.... whata ya think of this one then?

:)

Ah, the joys of spark erosion and stamping. (Or stamping and then spark erosion.)

I think its a beautifully executed example of a decorated movement ( although for some reason it made me think of one of Eschers never ending staircases, it seems to draw your eye down & down for ever!). However it is still just decorating the movement, The Blancpain I consider art mainly because of the way it incorporated a Sun, Moon and Star, just as the Breguet movement that S.L included had what looks like a Bass & Treble cleff incorporated. As I said before, one mans art is another mans .............. :D

[Mrcrowley]

Here's mine with see through back



and here's the front :D

Paul
What is that, please?
R

Hi Ralphy

It' lk on the glass & lk Colouring on the clasp. It came from the 'Bay & I bought it just because I liked it. If you don't know like the others, I like my Octagonal bezels :D