Jump to content
When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
  • Current Donation Goals

No ticks, it's authentic


Pugwash

Recommended Posts

For those who don't want to click, here's the grab of the watch:

265755-4567.png

I'm going to make myself out to be a bit of a geek, but I reckon it's the same prop Sub that Warrick Brown wore in the earlier seasons before switching to a more realistic digital.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crappy version of Flash? Not enough bandwidth?

Nope, latest Flash player (9 point-something) for Mac OS X, have approx. 8MB broadband.....oh wait, hold on, now working took a while to buffer that's all :doh:

Great clip - strange thing is I saw this episode only last week - the stiff was cheating at roulette with the three spike thingie in his shoe - yet I can't believe I missed that scene? :blink: Call of nature perhaps :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I don't know Puggy that little scene there seems a very blatant product placement to me. :whistling:

It's Las Vegas, they needed to show the guy spent a big hit the day before. Of course they'd use a Rolex: It's what most of us would do ... isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as was once said, in hollywood everything is a fake :)

but this fake sub is far beyond anything Ive seen before. It beats in its rubbishness even those allmightys luminor urinas fakes :lol:

nice catch Puggy ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a copy and paste of my reply on RWI:

Are you guys surprised?

99.9% of people out there will think the same. It's only people in here and other watch forums who obsess about all the little details that are magnified 3-5x in pics.

Even in this CSI scene, while thye had a close-up of the watch, it was a fairly quick passing shot (just like it would often be in real life) and unless someone pauses the shot to take a more detailed look, they aren't even going to have much chance to even guess that it's not real. Before I found these forums, I would have accepted it as a gen Rolex myself.

The biggest tell to someone who has a little idea of expensive gen watches isn't going to be the lack of AR or lume or crown guards or incorrect hand stack,etc., it's going to be that your movement is quartz (and ticking) when it should be automatic (and sweeping) and even then, some gens like Tag Heuer and Breitling include quartz watches i.e. the non-chrono Link and the Colt.

Taking off your watch and handing it over or hanging out in ADs (many of whom are still gonna be clueless) or with watch-crazy people will increase the chance that they will notice the flaws because they might know what to look for and, more importantly, they might actually care enough to look/question. Everyone else is going to sum you up in 1 second and either decide that you should (or can) be wearing a gen so it is, or that you don't look like you can afford that watch so it's possibly/likely a fake.

I'm sure we all know this although some may disagree with my last point about being "summed up" but felt like I had to get that off my chest anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a copy and paste of my reply on RWI:

Are you guys surprised?

99.9% of people out there will think the same. It's only people in here and other watch forums who obsess about all the little details that are magnified 3-5x in pics.

Even in this CSI scene, while thye had a close-up of the watch, it was a fairly quick passing shot (just like it would often be in real life) and unless someone pauses the shot to take a more detailed look, they aren't even going to have much chance to even guess that it's not real. Before I found these forums, I would have accepted it as a gen Rolex myself.

The biggest tell to someone who has a little idea of expensive gen watches isn't going to be the lack of AR or lume or crown guards or incorrect hand stack,etc., it's going to be that your movement is quartz (and ticking) when it should be automatic (and sweeping) and even then, some gens like Tag Heuer and Breitling include quartz watches i.e. the non-chrono Link and the Colt.

Taking off your watch and handing it over or hanging out in ADs (many of whom are still gonna be clueless) or with watch-crazy people will increase the chance that they will notice the flaws because they might know what to look for and, more importantly, they might actually care enough to look/question. Everyone else is going to sum you up in 1 second and either decide that you should (or can) be wearing a gen so it is, or that you don't look like you can afford that watch so it's possibly/likely a fake.

I'm sure we all know this although some may disagree with my last point about being "summed up" but felt like I had to get that off my chest anyway.

I do agree with you 100% - this issue (or a similar one) has been discussed several times in all the three forums I frequent... here people see the tiny details.. out there, barely anybody does. Having said that, I still don't understand why they are using a crappy fake Rolex (which still has to be sourced by the prop-guy) when you can bet your arm that at least three or four from the crew on set are wearing gen subs. All you do is ask "Hey Joe, can I borrow your sub for a sec?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up