# Dials for Dress Watches: Black or White?



## markdc (May 17, 2007)

I'm thinking about specifically of Patek's Annual Calendar, but really any dress watch is applicable.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

I prefer a white dial, not for it's impact on my "kit for the moment" or design asthetic of the watch, but, simply because it is easier to read!


----------



## Good Old Sledge (Jun 13, 2006)

I've had both - usually in sort of rotation (generally with different color bands). Over time, I have returned to the white dials and sold those with black. Easier to read and look more like a bright piece of jewelry than a hole in my arm.


----------



## Hobson (Mar 13, 2007)

Black dials seem to work better as a formal "evening" watch. They look a bit too dressy for day wear. More at home with a tuxedo than a suit. At least in my opinion.


----------



## Taxler (Oct 22, 2006)

I wouldn't consider the Patek Annual Calendar a dress watch; It has too many complications on the face. However, if I were going to buy that particular watch for dress use, I'd choose platinum/black because it looks the least busy. I own the Calatrava with an off-white face, but IMO, any shade of white other than bright-white is ideal for a dress watch.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Hobson said:


> Black dials seem to work better as a formal "evening" watch. They look a bit too dressy for day wear. More at home with a tuxedo than a suit. At least in my opinion.


That's funny, I always feel the other way round: white or creamy dial for dress functions and matte black dial for casual occassions. Reason might be that I am used to think of pilot's and diver's watches with a black dial...


----------



## bkdc (Mar 4, 2007)

It's nice to own both. I used to prefer black but now I prefer white.

Black dials are notoriously difficult to keep clean. It smudges easily with fingeroil and debris if accidentally touched when the watch is serviced. White dials stay much cleaner.


----------



## MrRogers (Dec 10, 2005)

My preferred dress combo is a plain black dial, polished SS, platinum or WG case and semi-gloss honey croc strap

MrR


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

bkdc said:


> It's nice to own both.


I recommend the Reverso Duo! :icon_smile:


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

Both can work very nicely, as neither really calls attention to itself. The rest of the watch is far more important than whether the dial is black or white, so I say get the one that appeals to you most.


----------



## kitonbrioni (Sep 30, 2004)

I personally prefer white faces but I also have black ones too.


----------



## smlaz (May 13, 2005)

I'd say that if the piece is SS, WG, or platinum then black would do as nicely as white. If red or yellow gold then only a cream colored face. To my eye a black face on a gold watch is not harmonious. And a white metal watch ought to have a black band, while a gold watch ought to have a brown band. Ultimately, buy what suits your eye, especially if you're springing for something as special as a PP Annual Calendar!
Cheers,
Steve


----------



## Mute (Apr 3, 2005)

It's a personal preference. I prefer white for the better contrast.


----------



## rip (Jul 13, 2005)

Albert said:


> That's funny, I always feel the other way round: white or creamy dial for dress functions and matte black dial for casual occassions. Reason might be that I am used to think of pilot's and diver's watches with a black dial...


I agree and for the same reasons. To me, the best look for a dress watch is gold with a white dial and leather strap (although I would use a darker strap than the one on this watch); 









for formal, if a watch at all, a platinum or white gold with white or silver dial and black strap.


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

It wasn't until after I bought a black-dialed watch that I realized how strongly I prefer a white dial. Live and learn.


----------



## acidicboy (Feb 17, 2006)

Imho, it all depends on your preference. Both black and white faces are alright in dressier occassions. What is more important I believe is the kind of watch you're wearing (dress not sport watch) and the strap of the watch.


----------



## bigCat (Jun 10, 2005)

DocHolliday said:


> It wasn't until after I bought a black-dialed watch that I realized how strongly I prefer a white dial. Live and learn.


Same here, my JLC Reverso GMT gets most use on the front (white) side. Reverse (black) side is relegated to travel duty only.


----------



## Cantabrigian (Aug 29, 2005)

Taxler said:


> I wouldn't consider the Patek Annual Calendar a dress watch; It has too many complications on the face. However, if I were going to buy that particular watch for dress use, I'd choose platinum/black because it looks the least busy. I own the Calatrava with an off-white face, but IMO, any shade of white other than bright-white is ideal for a dress watch.


Even here I never would have thought that someone could seriously think that an annual calendar wouldn't make a good dress watch...


----------



## Thurston (Aug 17, 2006)

I think that the dearth of true dress watches with black dials relative to white/buff/silver dials answers the question. When looking at sportier watches, black dials probably represent close to 60% of all watches. As a practical matter, most sports watches have hands with luminous fill. This provides a great contrast on a black dial. Dress watches have simple polished metal hands. These tend to disappear against black dials. Even JLC's solution of splitting the hands down the centerline and brushing one half and polishing the other doesn't work all that well. A good anti-reflective coating helps, but that's also uncommon on dress watches.


----------



## Taxler (Oct 22, 2006)

Cantabrigian said:


> Even here I never would have thought that someone could seriously think that an annual calendar wouldn't make a good dress watch...


It's not that it's an annual calendar, it's that this particular annual calendar has too many things on the face to make it an ideal dress watch.

Any setting other than dress, and I give the Patek Annual Calendar two thumbs up.:aportnoy:


----------



## Cantabrigian (Aug 29, 2005)

Taxler said:


> It's not that it's an annual calendar, it's that this particular annual calendar has too many things on the face to make it an ideal dress watch.
> 
> Any setting other than dress, and I give the Patek Annual Calendar two thumbs up.:aportnoy:


By dress do you mean tux or suit?

In either case, I completely disagree. A couple of subdials (without chronograph pushpieces) on an otherwise understated to the point of boring watch doesn't disqualify it as a dress watch.


----------



## Taxler (Oct 22, 2006)

Cantabrigian said:


> By dress do you mean tux or suit?
> 
> In either case, I completely disagree. A couple of subdials (without chronograph pushpieces) on an otherwise understated to the point of boring watch doesn't disqualify it as a dress watch.


I'm thinking of dress as formal, wedding, funeral, etc; I'm not including a business suit.


----------

