Author Topic: Antique Pocket Watches  (Read 7591 times)

Vrillon

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2010, 11:02:52 am »
Try taking a pic without the flash on shiny objects such as the watch above.  Too hard to read the marks due to the glare!

Ill try as best I can, the problem is it needs lighting to see, that pic was taken without flash.


sapphire

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3137
  • Karma: +34/-0
  • Without direction, we are lost.
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2010, 11:17:29 am »
Don't know if this helps ......


syl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #17 on: February 13, 2010, 12:55:11 pm »
In the very first picture you posted of a silver watch, is that the front of the watch with the dial and hands removed?

Vrillon

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #18 on: February 13, 2010, 12:58:29 pm »
In the very first picture you posted of a silver watch, is that the front of the watch with the dial and hands removed?

No its the front of the watch when its closed up.

nothing is removed out of the watch.

syl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2010, 04:56:23 pm »
No I mean the large picture that looks like the watch is open.

syl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2010, 05:11:37 pm »
Some pictures of the watch I have. The second picture is with the crystal off.

Vrillon

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2010, 05:18:21 pm »
is the 1st picture the inside from where the crystal screws on?

or is that the back of the watch?

yours is different then mine most likely, I think mine the back cover is stuck or something, I doubt its ever been off.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 05:22:44 pm by Vrillon »

syl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #22 on: February 13, 2010, 05:34:53 pm »
The first picture is of the back side of the movement. The dial and hands are on the other side of the movement. The second picture is of the face with the crystal off. You can see the hinge just above the 12. The lever to change the time is just above and to the right of the 1 o'clock position. As you can see the minute hand is broken but it can be replaced. The third picture is with the crystal on and the last one is another view of the movement. Your watch must be made differently. Does your watch run? Watches that run will be more valuable.

Vrillon

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Antique Pocket Watches
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2010, 05:41:12 pm »
The first picture is of the back side of the movement. The dial and hands are on the other side of the movement. The second picture is of the face with the crystal off. You can see the hinge just above the 12. The lever to change the time is just above and to the right of the 1 o'clock position. As you can see the minute hand is broken but it can be replaced. The third picture is with the crystal on and the last one is another view of the movement. Your watch must be made differently. Does your watch run? Watches that run will be more valuable.

It dont run currently, but I am not sure if its a watch you wind or what, mine also has a lever in it you pull out to change the time once you take the crystal off.
when messing with that, I am able to use the stem and change the hands back and forth which is a good sign.

When the lever is pushed in, you can hear a clicking sound when you turn the stem in counter clockwise motion, but it wont move any when turning it in clock wise motion.

« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 05:45:16 pm by Vrillon »