Vintage Watches: How Conservation, Restoration or Refurbishment Affects Values
By Desmond Guilfoyle Platinum Quality Author
There’s an ongoing debate in museum circles about the ethics of conservation
and restoration of what is categorised as Technological Heritage. Watches fit
into this category, and while we may scoff at armchair academic pronouncements
on how we should go about maintaining our collections, it’s worth more
than a thought.
The vintage watch market seems to operate not so much on the ethics of conservation,
restoration and preservation of historical integrity, but on the economics of
supply and demand as it applies to conserved, restored and indeed refurbished
technology. In many cases it’s ‘opinion’ that informs the
choice of what to do with a vintage watch and while there are as many opinions
as there are people, some opinions carry more weight financially than others.
Perhaps not so strangely, the high end of the market, often represented by
prices fetched at Antiquorum, Christies, Sothebys and others, reflects a decided
bias towards conservation and restoration over refurbishment. On rarer high-end
timepieces originality attracts premium prices, while refurbished high-end watches
are much less in demand.
So first let’s arrive at a working definition of conservation, restoration
and refurbishment so as to at least have a set of benchmarks upon which we may
base our restoration decisions.
CONSERVATION
A concept of conservation emerged about a decade and a half ago in respect
to vintage technology and is beginning to have an impact on the serious horological
markets. It basically argues that emphasis should be placed on preservation
of originality for the future and that making vintage technology appear pristine
and never used is analogous to vandalism.
The idea behind conservation is that all changes to the object should be reversible.
Take dials for example: If one was to take the conservation line when working
on a vintage dial, refinishing the dial would be out of the question, but stabilising
it with a protective layer of lacquer would, as long as the lacquer could be
removed at a later time.
The same logic applies to movements. The conservationist would argue that parts
should not be replaced because having the technology operating is far less important
than preserving its originality.
Here’s an example that places technological conservation into a broader
context. The Australian War Memorial has a collection of WW2 German military
aircraft, and when experts conducted their pre conservation condition survey
they identified a grey blue oxide coating on the aircrafts’ aluminium.
They conditionally identified the type and constituents of the coating and devised
a conservation strategy that ensured the original coating was not destroyed.
On similar aircraft in the United States, however, preservation work resulted
in the removal of the oxide coating, thus destroying the originality of the
technology and giving cause for confusion in scholarly investigation of the
future. Many in the field of technological conservation would argue that removing
an original coating in order to make the aircraft look new is unethical –
same thing for watches and clocks of historical value.
RESTORATION
Restoration is not identical to conservation. Restoration is a process that
attempts to return a piece of technology, in our case a timepiece, to a previous
state that a given restorer, complete with prejudices, assumptions and opinions
about what the object should represent, imagines to be original. Restoration
is personal to the restorer and that should never be forgotten.
However, in respect to technology, restoration is controversial, since it often
involves irreversible changes to the original technology in order to make it
work and function as it was meant to function.
With watches and clocks, for example, worn parts are removed, rust is treated,
damaged or faded dials are replaced with genuine factory dials, hands are either
re-plated or replaced, cases are polished, crystals are changed, seals are replaced
etc., etc. Prejudices, assumptions and ‘shop practice’ come into
play here as the restorer applies both an aesthetic logic (visual appeal) and
a functional logic (keeping the watch going to a factory standard) when deciding
what parts to replace during the restoration.
But if the parts are factory specified, the surfaces of materials are not changed
(eg removing some of the copper coating on a 500 series Omega movement through
improper use of solvents) and the work carried out on the watch is done according
to factory recommendations, then many people would say that is a reasonable
standard on which to base restorations of mass-produced watches. Clearly, you
would not have an ‘original’ as defined by conservationists, but
you would have preserved the ‘integrity’ of the piece by keeping
it to specifications.
Another aspect of restoration practiced by some restorers is to focus on functional
rather than aesthetic restoration. An example of functional restoration is to
replace worn parts and stabilise the condition of a watch while maintaining
the patina of the piece. This may include a very light polishing of the watch
and the use of treatment techniques to arrest further deterioration of the dial
and other non-mechanical parts of the watch. This more fully complies with those
who argue the ethical and monetary benefits of restoration over refurbishment.
REFURBISHMENT
Refurbishment is the practice of taking a complete piece, or part, of old technology
and making it look brand spanking new again. Refurbishment involves removing
an object’s past in the belief the new looking is best or that new looking
sells.
We see much evidence of refurbishment wherever we look. Old houses rebuilt
to look faux grande with more ornamentation than displayed originally; furniture
in the brassier antique shops that appears as smooth and new as the IKEA competitor's
product down the street; cars of the 50s and 60s chromed to the hilt and modified
to reflect modern concepts of a bygone era, and so on.
Like the examples above, a refurbished watch often goes beyond the original
factory brief. We see countless examples of Omegas, for example, with all traces
of their former lives obliterated by excessive polishing; refinished dials completed
with varying degrees of competence and unoriginal dial patterns fresh from the
overactive imaginations of dial refinishers; so-called new-old stock beads of
rice bracelets (as opposed to originals that have been restored); sharp and
shiny crowns replacing otherwise functional and nicely worn ones; the dressing
up of some models to look deluxe rather than standard; wrong movements (but,
hey, who cares no-one buying a new-old watch will probably look under the bonnet)
and numerous other touches that compromise the integrity of the original model.
SO WHAT IS THE STANDARD FOR WATCHES
Let’s return to the earlier point on opinion and acknowledge that opinions
are simply an expression of personal preference. If we are to build up a reasoned
argument that favours one opinion over another in respect to the conservation,
restoration or refurbishment of mass-produced watches, then we can choose to
look at where opinion converges into a body of knowledgeable practice.
First, there is a market for new-old in any stream of collectibles, and, judging
by the mountain of literature written about the new-old segment of various markets,
it’s usually where intrigued amateurs or freshly minted neophytes land.
Refurbished collectibles are generally a sellers market rather than a buyers
market, because buyers do not make distinctions other than visual appeal and
mythical investment value of vintage collectibles, thus placing themselves at
the mercy of sellers – same thing with vintage watches.
In reviewing a large range of books and magazines on horological restoration
and analysing academic pronouncements on the conservation of our technological
heritage, I believe the following points are worthy of consideration:
Conservation is the preferred option for important watches and clocks, particularly
those that embody technological innovation. Restoration amounts to wanton destruction
of heritage.
The more rare the object, the greater the case for conservation over restoration.
In the case of mass-produced watches, restoration is favoured by both the ‘expert’
and the knowledgeable ends of the market. Values are higher for working models
that meet fully a manufacturers specifications. In some cases, a watch that
has retained all of its original factory assembled parts, even though regulated
to compensate for wear, will fetch more than a restored watch that has had replacement
parts.
As the vintage watch market has grown both in size and breadth, there is a
growing segment that values ‘functional’ restoration – replacement
of worn movement parts and conservation that stabilises non-working parts of
a watch.
Refurbishment of part, as opposed to the whole, of a watch is generally preferred
by all ends of the market except the new-old segment. Refurbishment is generally
seen as an option when there are no other options.
Refurbishment to create a new-old watch has a market for newbies. The prices
paid can be high but re-selling values can be severely discounted.
So where do I stand? Put me in the Functional Restoration group!
(c) 2006 Desmond Guilfoyle
Desmond Guilfoyle in an award winning commentator on influence, persuasion
and charisma. He has written three books on those subjects and his book 'The
Charisma Effect' has been published in seven languages around the globe. For
further articles, tips and information visit his blog at http://charismacom.blogspot.com/
He also collects vintage Omega Constellations to remain sane, and his comprehensive
blog on Constellations can be found at http://omega-constellation-collectors.blogspot.com/
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Desmond_Guilfoyle
|
Watch Review -Talk 
