/fa/ - Fashion

>>15342373
I disagree, but only because I value watches that don't bring attention to their attributes. They simply exist at a higher quality than other. That's why watches are awesome though; they provoke preferences in the people who lust after them. Hence our disagreement.

The strangest thing is that I can appreciate watches that say too much when they're lower quality i.e. my Citizen Nighthawk or my incoming Omega Speedy Mark 40. They make a point of saying what they can do. But in my eyes they're not 'refined', they're 'tool' watches.

The Credor fits into the 'refined' category in my mind, like pic related. Just to be a dick, I'd say pic is the epitome of a 'dress watch' by definition, and I think the Credor could fall into this category too...if the damn crescent wasn't there.

The proportions of the hour markers and hands as well as the design of the case are what make it 'japanese' and thus 'individual' in a large field of high end dress watches. The crescent is unecessary, and thus a manifestation of the feeling of inferiority that is unjustifiably applied.

>fuck it, I'm drunk, so I can't formulate ideas. You know what i mean.

>>15297408
There aren't any shit decisions here Anon; the issue is what sings to you when you it's on your wrist and what doesn't. The 3878 was bad luck; it happens with these kinds of things.

1) Establish what you are actually 'collecting'. Do you want 'one of each' (i.e. dress watch, sports chronograph, diver, flieger, and complication?), do you want to collect mainly IWCs? Do you want to eventually go to a higher tier (i.e. JLC and VC, maybe even Patek?
2) Figure out what you wear regularly and what you don't. Also determine which watch you reach for the most emotionally. Put the others in a safe or sell them...no point having them if you don't wear them.
3) Once you've figured out 1 and 2, then you can go to watch boutiques and try every damn thing on that is within the price range and design specs you're looking for.

3 is a very important step. Older Anons have heard this story before, so I won't go through all of it. Bottom line? I went and tried on watches I'd always dreamed of owning and could now afford to seriously consider, and a few unpleasant surprises hit me.

1) The Omega Globemaster looks good in pics but horrendous on my wrist. Fucking awful.
2) The JLC Reverso is so light it feels like it's a gumball machine watch from Chuckecheezes.
3) The Speedy always looks perfect on my wrist. The Sapphire Sandwich does not.

The point is, these are all watches I think look amazing, but upon trying them on there are concerns. Sometimes, like the Speedy, they sing to you immediately when you try them on. Sometimes, you try something on and it feels and looks awful. Such is life.

Regarding the Grand Seiko; for me the aesthetic is like Zenith; I love the tech inside, but I hate the way it's presented outside. You can't go wrong with the tech and finishing though; I have a colleague who has one and it's perfect on his wrist...looks amazing. Have you looked into Breguet? Also, I'm a fan of VC, so why not look into them.

>>13872181
Interesting. Thanks for the knowledge Anon. I guess that ends that line of discussion....lol Have a beautiful watch for your trouble.

>>13710991
Maybe, one day...

>>13710992
Perhaps you're right. No, I don't need a field watch, I'm never in the field. I have a digital that I use on vacation, and I have a mechanical (Rotary) that I'll use if I think I have the potential of getting robbed...but in truth I don't need anymore watches at all. The ones I have my eye on would be for their value to me, or their historical value...but as I said above for some reason right now I couldn't care less. It's a very odd situation indeed.

Anyway, I'm gonna try and get some sleep. Thanks for listening Anons...it means a lot. Here, have a pic of something that I still think is beautiful.