Vintage rolex under microscope

[EH92]

Happy New Year guys.

I wonder if anyone has done an extensive study on vintage rolex under miscroscope. I am talking about 100x and above. I am curious how the naturally occured patina compare to the "man made" one. Or the aged tritium compare to recently relume with inactive tritium

[Erpin]

Sounds interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EH92]

I think someone out there has done research about this but never publish the result. The patina, engraving, printing in watch is like fingerprint. It tells a lot about the watch.

Can't say much here, but in gemstone industry, there are extensive study of inclusion (fingerprint). and the conclusions tell a lot of things like the origin of the stone, natural/synthetic, treatment, and a lot more.

[suligeo]

https://www.instagram.com/vintage_georgex/

[offrdmania]

A vintage Rolex under a microscope may be disappointing to some. Back then they were considered a daily worn tool watch and were not held to the highest standard like they are today. At that magnification, you will probably see many flaws that people really didnt care about back then.

[996marty]

Photos look great under magnification

[miamiclay]

Not nearly 100x, but there are some macros here -

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=891054

[EH92]

Originally Posted by suligeo

https://www.instagram.com/vintage_georgex/

The font's texture in the 3rd picture might be a good start as a potential "fingerprint". And the foam like tritium dot in the 2nd pic definitely a great fingerprint. I have seen something similar before. Thanks for sharing ;)

Originally Posted by miamiclay

Not nearly 100x, but there are some macros here -

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=891054

Thanks for sharing ;)