Re: Inner steel ring alignment is it fixed? Pro 300

kev017 · Post by **kev017** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 4:29 pm

I can't help but think that life is too short...

abeardsley2020 · Post by **abeardsley2020** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 4:30 pm

kev017 wrote:I can't help but think that life is too short...

If that’s what you feel fair enough. But it’s essentially a luxury product that costs a fair amount of money. It should be right.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Bahnstormer_vRS** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 4:40 pm

@GrahamB - with the photos of your Atoll 300, I'm seeing the '6' marker on the inner steel bezel ring, from top to bottom;

to the right, to the left and centred; with the bottom / centred photo looking as though the watch is flat and therefore the '6' inner steel bezel ring aligned correctly.

Do you concur?

Guy

Post by **Amor Vincit Omnia** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 4:52 pm

@Bahnstormer_vRS That’s what I’m seeing in Graham’s photos too.

exHowfener · Post by **exHowfener** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 5:51 pm

I can't help but think that life is too short...

Indeed it is. To ...

a) Sweat the small stuff
b) Put up with poor products/service

Your money, your choice.

kev017 · Post by **kev017** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 6:06 pm

Haven’t seen any photos of “poor products” on this thread.

MarkingTime · Post by **MarkingTime** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 6:59 pm

Amor Vincit Omnia wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2024 2:02 pm @abeardsley2020
The reason I asked was because I can see the letter A and the frame of the date window beneath the seconds hand, which suggests that that could be a screenshot of a Photoshop??

Or the effect motion blur...

A1soknownas · Post by **A1soknownas** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 7:25 pm

kev017 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2024 6:06 pm Haven’t seen any photos of “poor products” on this thread.

Check the first post on the first page of the thread.

Post by **Bahnstormer_vRS** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 7:47 pm

A1soknownas wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2024 7:25 pm
kev017 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2024 6:06 pm Haven’t seen any photos of “poor products” on this thread.
Check the first post on the first page of the thread.

That is a photo of a misaligned applied twin flag logo, not as the discussion seems to have evolved at a tangent, the '6' marker on the steel inner bezel on a C60 Trident 300, which I beleive @kev017 was referring to.

Guy

GrahamB · Post by **GrahamB** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 7:49 pm

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2024 4:40 pm @GrahamB - with the photos of your Atoll 300, I'm seeing the '6' marker on the inner steel bezel ring, from top to bottom;

to the right, to the left and centred; with the bottom / centred photo looking as though the watch is flat and therefore the '6' inner steel bezel ring aligned correctly.

Do you concur?

Guy

Yep that's what I think! Literally the tiniest angle can "throw it off". I think mine is all good! I've checked my C60 Graphite LE and it seems equally alike!!

Post by **Bahnstormer_vRS** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 8:15 pm

Admin Team note

The majority of the early posts in this topic / thread had been initially posted in the Misaligned applied twin flag swish topic, derailing and dragging that thread 'off topic'.

Those post have been moved to this topic / thread to keep the discussion 'on topic' of Inner steel ring alignment is it fixed? Pro 300 and therefore, on occasion, may seem to be out of context; except in the wider scheme they are in context.

May the discussion continue.

Guy

Post by **Bahnstormer_vRS** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 10:57 pm

@abeardsley2020 - in my post of 3:07pm this afternoon I suggested "pics to follow" of my C60 Atoll 300 and C60 Trident Pro 300 Coronation watches.

Looking at my C60 Atoll 300 earlier this evening I had a thought which I'll throw open to you with the aim of trying to be helpful and constructive, as opposed to critical.

The thought? Parallax Error.

Now; Parallax Error has been mentioned and discussed in the past but only, as far as I'm able to recall, in the context of taking photographs with a camera. I know that I've posted at some stage the point of being sure to line up the lens of a camera accurately with the subject you're taking a photo of; especially considering that when using a smartphone the camera lens, with the phone held sideways in landscape mode, is often in the top left hand corner of the phone, not the centre.

You've mentioned on numerous occasions that you've had 'about 5' C60 Trident Pro 300 with the '6' marker on the steel inner bezel ring being off to the right when you look at it. Have you got any photos of this, that you've perhaps sent to CW or are you relying entirely on your eyesight?

Please bear with me on this . . . . .

As above, when taking a photo one wants to be sure that the camera lens is lined up with the subject, but what about when you look at it with your eyes?

Looking at my Atoll 300, I thought, 'am I looking straight on?' Both eyes? Ah, but surely to replicate the camera scenario, you have to look with only one eye; be it left or right.

If, though, you are looking at the subject with both eyes, you might think that you're getting a balanced view but what if you have a 'dominant eye' you will see the subject primarily with this eye. Your eyes will be something like 6cm - 8cm apart (depending on the size and shape of your head). This will mean that, assuming the subject is in line with the centre of your head / eyes / nose your 'dominant eye' will be offset 3cm - 4cm to the left or right which may well lead to Parallax Error.

I trust this makes sense and, as mentioned, I'm trying to be helpful and constructive, as opposed to critical with this scenario.

Guy

abeardsley2020 · Post by **abeardsley2020** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 11:11 pm

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote:[mention]abeardsley2020[/mention] - in my post of 3:07pm this afternoon I suggested "pics to follow" of my C60 Atoll 300 and C60 Trident Pro 300 Coronation watches.

Looking at my C60 Atoll 300 earlier this evening I had a thought which I'll throw open to you with the aim of trying to be helpful and constructive, as opposed to critical.

The thought? Parallax Error.

Now; Parallax Error has been mentioned and discussed in the past but only, as far as I'm able to recall, in the context of taking photographs with a camera. I know that I've posted at some stage the point of being sure to line up the lens of a camera accurately with the subject you're taking a photo of; especially considering that when using a smartphone the camera lens, with the phone held sideways in landscape mode, is often in the top left hand corner of the phone, not the centre.

You've mentioned on numerous occasions that you've had 'about 5' C60 Trident Pro 300 with the '6' marker on the steel inner bezel ring being off to the right when you look at it. Have you got any photos of this, that you've perhaps sent to CW or are you relying entirely on your eyesight?

Please bear with me on this . . . . .

As above, when taking a photo one wants to be sure that the camera lens is lined up with the subject, but what about when you look at it with your eyes?

Looking at my Atoll 300, I thought, 'am I looking straight on?' Both eyes? Ah, but surely to replicate the camera scenario, you have to look with only one eye; be it left or right.

If, though, you are looking at the subject with both eyes, you might think that you're getting a balanced view but what if you have a 'dominant eye' you will see the subject primarily with this eye. Your eyes will be something like 6cm - 8cm apart (depending on the size and shape of your head). This will mean that, assuming the subject is in line with the centre of your head / eyes / nose your 'dominant eye' will be offset 3cm - 4cm to the left or right which may well lead to Parallax Error.

I trust this makes sense and, as mentioned, I'm trying to be helpful and constructive, as opposed to critical with this scenario.

Guy

Yes this makes sense. I understand what you are saying. I may order again and use methods above to try and work out what I am seeing. Thank you for your detailed response. Thank you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

magicman · Post by **magicman** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 11:12 pm

To my eye, through a loupe everything is perfectly aligned, apart from the date wheel, which looks slightly off to the left.
I've done my best to take a square on photo.

It's Weird because I can't see the date without glasses, so it doesn't bother me, but the Bezel or minute track, being off by a fraction of a mm, would, even though i probably wouldn't see it, without my glasses, either.

Regards Steve

abeardsley2020 · Post by **abeardsley2020** » Tue Aug 13, 2024 11:29 pm

magicman wrote:
20240813_230311.jpg
To my eye, through a loupe everything is perfectly aligned, apart from the date wheel, which looks slightly off to the left.
I've done my best to take a square on photo.

It's Weird because I can't see the date without glasses, so it doesn't bother me, but the Bezel or minute track, being off by a fraction of a mm, would, even though i probably wouldn't see it, without my glasses, either.

Regards Steve

What size is this one the 38mm or 40mm? I think I will order another it’s been a good year since I last tried.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Christopher Ward Forum

Christopher Ward Forum