Looks better in photos

[dreyep]

How often do we hear that a watch looks so much better in reality than in photos? The new Air King, the Milgauss blue, the Exp II polar 42. In the last week I have read this about all of these on here.

But maybe there's a reference that actually disappoints in reality, while looking absolutely fabulous in photos.

Any candidates?

[xspect]

Any watch that I can’t affird


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jeffnnj]

Yup. The Daytona. Looks much smaller in person which is one of the main reasons I’ve never pulled the trigger. Well that and lack of a date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AF_Rob]

I watched it looks better in person it’s definitely the Reverso. The dial has such depth and texture to it. The watch underwhelming in person is Tudor divers for the opposite reason... my opinion, of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RolexDad]

I agree that the Black Bay lineup were underwhelming when I handled them in person finally. But I think this scenario is more common when buying sub-$1000 watches. Finish and quality is often a let down at those lower prices. That’s not something we experience with Rolex.

[watchwatcher]

I've yet to find a Rolex where even the best photo does it justice.

And that's saying something considering the level of photography talent that we have on TRF.

[zjd168]

almost all meteorite and MOP dial watches. The light must be perfect otherwise they look quite disappointed.

[Bobby T]

As much as I love Daytonas, they are way more impressive in photos than in person.

[Dnf888]

Originally Posted by jeffnnj

Yup. The Daytona. Looks much smaller in person which is one of the main reasons I’ve never pulled the trigger. Well that and lack of a date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Totally agree. Looks amazing in all the incoming pictures, but the only Rolex I would classify as looking disgusting on my wrist, which is why my wife lucked out. It looks great on her wrist. However, she is also annoyed about the lack of a date.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[123Blueface]

Didn’t disappoint at all but frankly, to me it looked way better in photos than on my wrist.
The new CHNR.

[Boaters]

To me they always look better on the wrist

[42itus]

The DSSD blue black dial looks awesome in photos. It looks pretty damn good on my brother and it looks way too big on me. I rock it anyway.

[nick800]

DJ41 Blue looks better in pics

[VicLeChic]

The Hulk looks fabulous on some pictures where a dark emerald dial.can be seen.

However, I found it awful on my wrist at the AD, like some bright green lizard yelling at me under certain angles then transforming into a quiet dark green almost black animal.

I still find it stunning on some of the pictures I see around.

[vinny84]

Originally Posted by jeffnnj

Yup. The Daytona. Looks much smaller in person which is one of the main reasons I’ve never pulled the trigger. Well that and lack of a date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s funny, I just left an AD and saw a RG Daytona on OF. First thought that popped in my mind was how small it is in person. Not sure if I would consider anymore, but then again it wasn’t on my wrist either

[HogwldFLTR]

Walking a slippery slope here; risking insulting other owners. I love the photos of the diagonal motif on the Day Date Pt. In person I found it less eye catching. I chose the Daytona Pt instead as it is really a beauty both in person and in pictures.

Originally Posted by vinny84

That’s funny, I just left an AD and saw a RG Daytona on OF. First thought that popped in my mind was how small it is in person. Not sure if I would consider anymore, but then again it wasn’t on my wrist either

It's an interesting conversation as I just bought the Daytona 50th Platona. Maybe with my 6.5 inch wrist there's a difference but it neither looks small nor feels small imho.

[vinny84]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Walking a slippery slope here; risking insulting other owners. I love the photos of the diagonal motif on the Day Date Pt. In person I found it less eye catching. I chose the Daytona Pt instead as it is really a beauty both in person and in pictures.



It's an interesting conversation as I just bought the Daytona 50th Platona. Maybe with my 6.5 inch wrist there's a difference but it neither looks small nor feels small imho.

Your pic makes it look like the perfect size. I think I just need to try it on

[ace12]

They look better in person than in pictures IMO

[gin47]

Most Rolex i have seen in pictures look way better in real life, hard to see a picture that actually does justice to a Rolex.

[mistercoach32]

Originally Posted by jeffnnj

Yup. The Daytona. Looks much smaller in person which is one of the main reasons I’ve never pulled the trigger. Well that and lack of a date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I second this 100%.

[Chadridv]

Originally Posted by jeffnnj

Yup. The Daytona. Looks much smaller in person which is one of the main reasons I’ve never pulled the trigger. Well that and lack of a date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

100% agree that it looks smaller in person.

100% disagree that it doesn't look as attractive. Just as stunning in person as it is in the photos IMO.

[Wcdhtwn]

BLNR for me. I think is looks good "in person", it isn't a disappointment, but not as good as it photographs. The opposite, watch that bores the hell out of me in pictures is the Explorer, but I think it's terrific in person.

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by VicLeChic

The Hulk looks fabulous on some pictures where a dark emerald dial.can be seen.

However, I found it awful on my wrist at the AD, like some bright green lizard yelling at me under certain angles then transforming into a quiet dark green almost black animal.

I still find it stunning on some of the pictures I see around.

In the light of day-it's stunning.

[1665fan]

All Daytona’s look better in person and if they are too small you are probably a breitling or Panerai person.....

[AEC]

Originally Posted by dreyep

How often do we hear that a watch looks so much better in reality than in photos? The new Air King, the Milgauss blue, the Exp II polar 42. In the last week I have read this about all of these on here.

But maybe there's a reference that actually disappoints in reality, while looking absolutely fabulous in photos.

Any candidates?

A friend at the office was sporting a new Cartier Tank MC the other day, and I truly tried to be wowed, but...

I'm hoping to bump into him again so I can have a closer look. I hope to have a Cartier Tank of some sort in my watch box some day (The Americaine, perhaps), and I don't think I had a long enough look at his to get a good impression.

[Avilanche]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

BLNR for me. I think is looks good "in person", it isn't a disappointment, but not as good as it photographs. The opposite, watch that bores the hell out of me in pictures is the Explorer, but I think it's terrific in person.

I felt the same for BLNR...whereas in fotos it looks terrific, cos the blue stands out due to subtle auto image processing in fotos...

[T3F]

For me, the 214270 was pretty underwhelming in person but I really liked it in photos, and I ended up selling it after ~6 months. I also like Datejusts in photos, but they always feel ill-proportioned when I try one on. Quite a few of Pateks (e.g., 5170, 5296, 5524, 5960) also fell way short of my expectations from pictures. The Speedmaster CK2998 was much more "bleh" in the metal than in photos. I hate to admit it, but I just bought a 126715CHNR a few weeks ago, and I'm not liking it nearly as much as I thought I would from the photos. For me, the rose gold doesn't really pop in person like it does it photos -- it often seems more like brown gold than rose gold, as there's very little red/rose tone -- and the brown on the bezel is too light.

[nch209]

I have mentioned it before, but the LVc (to me) is much better in photos. I don't know what it is- but in the flesh the green looks too milky to me, but most pics make it look good.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by T3F

For me, the 214270 was pretty underwhelming in person but I really liked it in photos, and I ended up selling it after ~6 months. I also like Datejusts in photos, but they always feel ill-proportioned when I try one on. Quite a few of Pateks (e.g., 5170, 5296, 5524, 5960) also fell way short of my expectations from pictures. The Speedmaster CK2998 was much more "bleh" in the metal than in photos. I hate to admit it, but I just bought a 126715CHNR a few weeks ago, and I'm not liking it nearly as much as I thought I would from the photos. For me, the rose gold doesn't really pop in person like it does it photos -- it often seems more like brown gold than rose gold, as there's very little red/rose tone -- and the brown on the bezel is too light.

Some useful advice... If it's underwhelming or bleh when you first see it, it won't get any better with time.

[yannis]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Walking a slippery slope here; risking insulting other owners. I love the photos of the diagonal motif on the Day Date Pt. In person I found it less eye catching. I chose the Daytona Pt instead as it is really a beauty both in person and in pictures.



It's an interesting conversation as I just bought the Daytona 50th Platona. Maybe with my 6.5 inch wrist there's a difference but it neither looks small nor feels small imho.

Having an early Christmas mate? Looks great man.