ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

mfer · 29 July 2008, 04:54 AM

How many of us have seen a picture of a watch and said "Hate it! Love it! It's okay, but not my thing." etc, etc, etc.

I'm guilty of this. I never saw the appeal of the GMT IIc. I thought it looked disproportionate and said, "I'd never own it! I'd stick to the old GMT II". Then last week, I saw it for the first time..................bought it! Also, the TT Daytona with white dial. To me that thing looks like $h!t in pics, but trying it on is a totally different story. I mean this watch is cheaper than the SS version and I don't even like TT watches....

Panerai's always looked goofy to me, but then I see their appeal when looking at them in the real world. When the WG Blue Sub came out, EVERYONE (except two people, me included) wanted one. Now many people are saying how nice they look.

It goes the other way too. I LOVE the way the Polar Expy II looks, but I put it on and I'm sooooo disappointed. Even today I look at pics and it looks soooo good, but I just can't wear it. I'll probable change my mind again...

I guess all I'm saying is that I'm through making judgment on watches until I see them myself. I'm going out on a limb here, but maybe even the Leopard Daytona looks good!!!!!!
Ok, I'm

on that one:

Sam Taha · 29 July 2008, 06:16 AM

Speaking of the leopard daytona, I saw a lady wear one in London last week (yes, a real one), and it's full of diamond and rubies. I asked the AD about its price, he said 47 thousand pounds, and change. It'll probably be the only time I ever see one in the "wild" :-)

kcmo · 29 July 2008, 07:17 AM

Mik, I totally agree with you! I've been both disappointed and exhilarated in seeing a watch in person...makes all the difference to have it on the wrist!

n9zez · 29 July 2008, 07:19 AM

I agree as well.

No if my AD would just get a Milguass in so that I could see one.........

Steven79 · 29 July 2008, 07:53 AM

Love the pepsi gmt on paper..

Hated it on my wrist.. felt soo light and insignificant.

GBJIV · 29 July 2008, 07:54 AM

This is a very true statement. So much different in person. I have gone in twice now to buy something specific and left with something completely different.

mfer · 29 July 2008, 07:56 AM

Good, so I'm not the only one then.

Frampton · 29 July 2008, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfer

Panerai's always looked goofy to me, but then I see their appeal when looking at them in the real world.

The Panerai example hits home. I never saw the appeal until I strapped one on, and WOW, what a watch. I felt the same about two tone watches. But as soon as I saw a 16613 up close, I knew I had to own one.

Z-Sub · 29 July 2008, 03:22 PM

Will see if DSSD looks better in person. Holding out on this one.

Dubai · 29 July 2008, 03:31 PM

It's matter of chioce and i agree we can't judge a watch by seeing a picture or see it for the first time !!

ashu2289 · 29 July 2008, 03:32 PM

I agree that "in flesh" and "in pictures" are two different experiences!!!!!

I always loved GMT II Ceramic SS in the pictures but when I saw it in flesh the reverse was the case, I didn't find anything unique about the watch

The same was my experience with LV

Although for Explorer II, I didn't like it in pictures but when I put that watch on my wrist, I love it

boa2 · 29 July 2008, 03:32 PM

Definitely. Some I liked even more, and others less, than in photos. I now even try on watches that I'm convinced I won't like, and am often surprised.

My wife suggested trying something, and it's made a big difference when I shop for watches. In addition to looking at the watch on my wrist, I also hold the watch up in a small mirror, and in a floor-length as well, if they have one. It makes such a difference in perspective.

Ed Rooney · 30 July 2008, 01:30 AM

I never liked the photos of the GMTIIc, but it was awesome in person. Reverse for the old GMT II.

dsimon9 · 30 July 2008, 01:40 AM

I was never impressed with the green crystal Milgauss. I had only seen it in pictures. The other day, a local AD had one and he let me see it. Wow, big difference. A much nicer looking watch in person.

He was asking msrp for it, but was holding it for another customer.

Trurolexer · 30 July 2008, 01:47 AM

Agree...Agree...

I bought Expy polar because I like the look in pics. After I owned, I think this Rolex is not for me, so sorry. I flip it to bought my Sub ND COSC.

Brilliant decesion for me.

Atlanta · 30 July 2008, 09:58 AM

I know lightning might strike me, but the sub felt a little light for me and the bezel wasn't what I expected, but I sure love the way they look!

mike · 30 July 2008, 10:02 AM

Yep.

A Photo is one thing. Trying them on is where the rubber meets the road.

29 July 2008, 04:54 AM	#1
mfer "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Real Name: Mik Location: USA Posts: 13,723	Pictures Don't Do These Things Justice!!!! How many of us have seen a picture of a watch and said "Hate it! Love it! It's okay, but not my thing." etc, etc, etc. I'm guilty of this. I never saw the appeal of the GMT IIc. I thought it looked disproportionate and said, "I'd never own it! I'd stick to the old GMT II". Then last week, I saw it for the first time..................bought it! Also, the TT Daytona with white dial. To me that thing looks like $h!t in pics, but trying it on is a totally different story. I mean this watch is cheaper than the SS version and I don't even like TT watches.... Panerai's always looked goofy to me, but then I see their appeal when looking at them in the real world. When the WG Blue Sub came out, EVERYONE (except two people, me included) wanted one. Now many people are saying how nice they look. It goes the other way too. I LOVE the way the Polar Expy II looks, but I put it on and I'm sooooo disappointed. Even today I look at pics and it looks soooo good, but I just can't wear it. I'll probable change my mind again... I guess all I'm saying is that I'm through making judgment on watches until I see them myself. I'm going out on a limb here, but maybe even the Leopard Daytona looks good!!!!!! Ok, I'm on that one: __________________ member#3242

29 July 2008, 07:19 AM	#4
n9zez "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Real Name: Jordan Location: Indiana Watch: GMT Master II C Posts: 418	I agree as well. No if my AD would just get a Milguass in so that I could see one......... __________________ 116710 GMT Master II Ceramic Black Bezel M Serial (HAVE) 16710 GMT Master II Coke (HAD) 16622 Yacht-Master Platinum / SS (WANT) 116509 Daytona WG Meteorite (GRAIL)

29 July 2008, 07:54 AM	#6
GBJIV "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Jackson Location: So. California Posts: 2,893	This is a very true statement. So much different in person. I have gone in twice now to buy something specific and left with something completely different. __________________ Jackson

29 July 2008, 07:56 AM	#7
mfer "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Real Name: Mik Location: USA Posts: 13,723	Good, so I'm not the only one then. __________________ member#3242

29 July 2008, 03:22 PM	#9
Z-Sub 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: So Cal, USA Watch: Not a ONEWatch Man Posts: 7,383	Dssd Will see if DSSD looks better in person. Holding out on this one. __________________ SS Submariner Date "Z" SS SeaDweller "D" SS Submariner "Random" TT Blue Submariner "P" SS GMT-Master ll "M", Pepsi Pam 311, 524, 297

29 July 2008, 06:16 AM	#2
Sam Taha "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Abu Dhabi Watch: Rolex Submariner Posts: 96	Speaking of the leopard daytona, I saw a lady wear one in London last week (yes, a real one), and it's full of diamond and rubies. I asked the AD about its price, he said 47 thousand pounds, and change. It'll probably be the only time I ever see one in the "wild" :-)

29 July 2008, 07:17 AM	#3
kcmo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Karis Location: USA Posts: 19,377	Mik, I totally agree with you! I've been both disappointed and exhilarated in seeing a watch in person...makes all the difference to have it on the wrist!

29 July 2008, 07:53 AM	#5
Steven79 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Steven Location: Houston Watch: Sub Posts: 1,175	Love the pepsi gmt on paper.. Hated it on my wrist.. felt soo light and insignificant.

29 July 2008, 03:31 PM	#10
Dubai "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: UAE Posts: 232	It's matter of chioce and i agree we can't judge a watch by seeing a picture or see it for the first time !!

29 July 2008, 03:32 PM	#11
ashu2289 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Real Name: Ashutosh Location: Rochester NY Watch: Daytonas,SD Posts: 2,342	I agree that "in flesh" and "in pictures" are two different experiences!!!!! I always loved GMT II Ceramic SS in the pictures but when I saw it in flesh the reverse was the case, I didn't find anything unique about the watch The same was my experience with LV Although for Explorer II, I didn't like it in pictures but when I put that watch on my wrist, I love it __________________ Everything becomes nothing after ROLEX 116520 SS Daytona White Dial 116520 SS Daytona Black Dial 116523 18K&SS Daytona Slate Dial 16600 Sea-Dweller 16710 GMT Master II Pepsi Bezel 16613 18K&SS Submariner Blue Dial 116660 Deepsea Sea-Dweller

29 July 2008, 03:32 PM	#12
boa2 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: US Watch: Me Now Posts: 3,685	Definitely. Some I liked even more, and others less, than in photos. I now even try on watches that I'm convinced I won't like, and am often surprised. My wife suggested trying something, and it's made a big difference when I shop for watches. In addition to looking at the watch on my wrist, I also hold the watch up in a small mirror, and in a floor-length as well, if they have one. It makes such a difference in perspective. __________________ "Facts and truth really don't have much to do with each other."

30 July 2008, 01:30 AM	#13
Ed Rooney "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Annapolis, MD Watch: Sea-Dweller 16600 Posts: 5,081	I never liked the photos of the GMTIIc, but it was awesome in person. Reverse for the old GMT II.

30 July 2008, 01:40 AM	#14
dsimon9 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Colorado Posts: 284	I was never impressed with the green crystal Milgauss. I had only seen it in pictures. The other day, a local AD had one and he let me see it. Wow, big difference. A much nicer looking watch in person. He was asking msrp for it, but was holding it for another customer.

30 July 2008, 01:47 AM	#15
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	Agree...Agree... I bought Expy polar because I like the look in pics. After I owned, I think this Rolex is not for me, so sorry. I flip it to bought my Sub ND COSC. Brilliant decesion for me.

30 July 2008, 09:58 AM	#16
Atlanta "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Jack Location: Atlanta, GA Watch: 126619LB & 114270 Posts: 767	I know lightning might strike me, but the sub felt a little light for me and the bezel wasn't what I expected, but I sure love the way they look! __________________ Member# 14554

30 July 2008, 10:02 AM	#17
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	Yep. A Photo is one thing. Trying them on is where the rubber meets the road.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)