fake or real?

[archeophoto]

It's that camera of theirs I tell you. Probably a clip-on Fisheye lens to maximize photographic desk space

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/ws/eBayISAPI....#ht_5611wt_940

I'm driving myself nuts here and I may find myself banished for my lack of acumen, but the watch listed above looks like a fake to me too.

As always, I bow to those who are more knowledgeable than myself, as I'm here to learn, but that is my sincere impression.

I wish the usual experts would show up and put these matters to rest.

I just hope you're right for your sake.

Keep up posted.

[FNFZ4]

Originally Posted by archeophoto

It's that camera of theirs I tell you. Probably a clip-on Fisheye lens to maximize photographic desk space

magnification is incorrect i think. im comparing it with mine and it does not look like 2.5X

[nowzen]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Bear in mind that I'm comparing the pictured watch to my own 14060M.

"Blown-out" means that the exposure is so bright that no details appear in the blown-out area. Of the details that are not blown-out, the coronet looks suspect.

It is good to understand the terms used before dismissing them.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound 'dismissive'. Our retouch guys in our television production and design studio in Toronto used the term 'blown out' in reference to the purposeful removal of something from the image... probably derived from the old days of photoretouching by airbrush.

I now understand you are using it in the flash photography sense. I presumed the former 'retouched' sense since you mentioned the pictures looked 'craftily composed' when to me they look like lousy photography.

[GradyPhilpott]

No problem, nowzen.

When I say "craftily posed," I mean that the kinds of things that one would look for in order to authenticate are not clearly visible.

Honest sellers almost always show clear shots of the dial, including the coronet on the dial, the date as seen through the cyclops, the coronet on the clasp, and also on the crown.

When all you have to go by is some pictures on a website, it is important that the pictures be of high quality and from many angles.

I'm not really all that good at authenticating watches by photos, unless of course the watch is a real hatchet job, but still when someone posts pictures of a watch, I do my best to examine the photos with a very critical eye.

[Andad]

Grady,

I think it's good and you don't.

This is what the Forum is for......opinions.

You could be right.

I could be w...wr...wro...mistaken.

[Goiguidoc]

Nice first generation of 14060.
A bit expensive IMO...

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by directioneng

Grady,

I think it's good and you don't.

This is what the Forum is for......opinions.

You could be right.

I could be w...wr...wro...mistaken.

I never mind being wrong in these matter, because they are learning exercises for me and I never present myself as an expert.

I used my own 14060M for comparison and there are differences, which hardly means a watch is fake, but I had to come down on one side of the fence or the other.

We're missing two of our regular dead-eye members, who can spot a fake in a crowed, smoke-filled room at 50 paces.

[archeophoto]

So I got the watch today. Oh my, does it ever look different then in the horrible photos the seller provided. I'm 99% confident that the watch is genuine. It is amazing how photos can distort features of a watch. Look at the coronet on the dial in my photos and the coronet in the sellers photos. I can see now why Grady was suspicious. The watch is mint except for a little scratch on the crown, which does not bother me. Tomorrow I will bring it to the AD to have it looked over. I think for $4250 I got a good deal. If everything checks out at the AD, I'm happy! Here are some quick photos:

[mrbill2mrbill2]

That crown is the correct size. Glad it was a case of distorted pics and it worked out for you. I thought it was fake.

[Andelain]

That's a good looking watch. Hope the AD says you're right.

[Welshwatchman]

Congrats on your purchase.

The original pictures looked 99.99% good to me as do your current pics.

In my experience there's not been a 14060(m)(cosc) fake that's anything but obvious at 25 yards.

[Gaucho20]

Congrats on the purchase. Great looking watch; glad it's authentic! Now, how about a wrist shot?

[GradyPhilpott]

Congratulations.

I'm very pleased that it's looks so well in a decent set of pictures.

That looks very much like the one I have on my wrist now.

[Goiguidoc]

Real, but a bit expensive IMO.

[chronomkoz]

Gotta love this forum - it's like watching Hercule Poirot and Sherlock Holmes going through clues together...

Glad your purchase was real in the end - she looks beautiful indeed!

[archeophoto]

Just came back from the AD. Everything checks out. Thank god!
My first Rolex. What a feeling!
I thank everybody that contributed to this thread, especially Grady. It helps tremendously to get different opinions and views and get alerted to different aspects of a watch purchase.
This is a great forum!

[floater156]

I'd recommend buying your first from an AD, otherwise you'll always be wondering if it's 100% original inside and out

[FNFZ4]

Originally Posted by Goiguidoc

Real, but a bit expensive IMO.

if youre from Canada 4250 isnt a bad deal...not great but fair...there are cheaper ones that came along here that is true but those are once in a blue moon.

[93 Turbo]

Well done, glad it worked out. Your first pics looked pretty good. Now you can relax and enjoy your new watch.

[nowzen]

Congrats... looks like great condition and the price is certainly fair.

Now to join the club...