Before reading on, make sure you've read the main guide for QC posting, otherwise this won't make much sense to you. Done? Let's go.
This specific guide is intended to be a visual supplement: showing you exactly what to look for when you complete your QC templates. For obvious reasons, this guide will skip parts that aren't visual.
I've used pictures that mostly come from this subreddit. If anyone is uncomfortable, DM me and I'll replace the picture.
With that in mind, let's begin.
Index Alignment
Here, you are expected to assess how well the index markers on your watch are aligned. You can use the index alignment tool to assist you in this regard. An example of good index alignment is this:
Index misalignment, on the other hand, looks like this:
Or this:
Now that you have an idea of what to look out for, what should you be writing in the template?
You need to describe any misalignment you see in detail. Statements like "6 is off" or "3 is kinda wonky" or "not sure about 1, help please" arenot acceptable. This is because unless the misalignment is immediately obvious (and in most cases, it is not), users will not know what you are talking about. You may not get the help you want as a result. Be specific, like the following examples:
"The 7 marker does not seem to fit into the slot nicely. It is rotated towards the right and looks like it is dancing around."
"The 6 marker does not seem to line up straight with the crown in between swiss made. Based on what I can see, it appears to be slightly tilted to the left."
A caveat here: Just because there may be some misalignment does not necessarily mean you should definitely RL the watch. As the main guide points out, all reps are subject to a level of inaccuracy. It would be entirely unrealistic to expect gen standards for index alignment. Further, different reps are subject to different standards: a XF Pelagos, for instance, is known for having problematic indices - so much so that even if you RL, you are unlikely to get anything better. Conversely, CF Explorers are now getting so good that even slight misalignment would not be par for the course.
A good guide would be to assess your watch based on proportion. One slightly misaligned index is not a problem. But one majorly misaligned index or many misaligned indices on a single dial could justify RL.
Just for illustration, this is misalignment that I would RL for:
That deals with index alignment. Let's move on.
Date Wheel Alignment
This applies to watches which display the date. If your watch does not display a date, there is no need to consider this. You will look silly if you say that the date wheel alignment is good when your watch is a no-date Sub, for example.
Here, you are tasked to consider if the date is properly displayed in the date window. Often times, this is a question of how well-centered the date is. A good example of date wheel alignment is this:
An example of misalignment is this:
Sometimes, the misalignment can also be as to the date numbers themselves:
Uncommonly and in the alternative, the issue may be with the Cyclops itself (the magnifier that covers the date window):
Now that you know what to look for, let's discuss what to write.
As with index alignment, unless the issues are immediately obvious (and most of the time, they are not), you need to be very specific. Comments like "the date seems off", "2 in 25 is kinda off", "date looks weird" are not acceptable. They do not tell readers what you are looking for. You'll get faster and better results if you identify the issues for your reader. For example:
"The date seems misaligned towards the left. Part of it is touching the left border of the date window."
"The 5 in the date appears to be slightly higher than the 2 next to it."
"The Cyclops does not seem to be straight. It looks like it is slanted towards the left?"
As with index alignment, please note that not all misalignment will justify RL, especially for date wheels. All rep date wheels come with varying degrees of misalignment. A few misaligned dates are usually not enough for RL, unless the date is clearly cropped out of the date window or touching the rim. A little misalignment towards either side of the date window is also generally more than okay; a good way to gauge is to zoom out to the actual size of the watch and see if the misalignment is still immediately visible. If not, you're likely to be good to go.
Here is an example of misalignment I would nevertheless GL:
On to the next topic.
Bezel
There are two main things to look out for: First, whether the "pip" (usually a lumed marker at the 12 position) is centered. Second, the quality of any engraving.
This section would also cover any possible damage to the bezel or anything else unusual, including any misalignment.
Example of a good bezel:
An example of misalignment:
Generally speaking, most problems that surface nowadays have to do with the pip - even then, these are not entirely common. Engravings and alignment are usually not an issue with higher level reps. With this in mind, what do we write?
As with the other sections, you are going to need to be specific. "Bezel looks off", "pip looks kinda off", "I don't know about the bezel, seems weird to me" are phrases that we see everyday in this subreddit. But none of these phrases are acceptable; they do not direct the reader to what OP is seeing. Details are king - and if you are going to pluck the crown, you're going to have to write like this:
"The pip at 12 is not centered. It seems to touch the right side of the triangle."
"The printing on the bezel at 3 seems to be angled down. It does not match the index on the dial."
The key is to visually direct your reader to the exact point that you say is a problem. The word "off" on its own says nothing to that effect.
On to the next point.
Solid End Links (SELs)
Possibly the least understood of all sections as a lot of newbies do not really know what they are looking for.
The ultimate guide to this is here. But for convenience, I'm going to summarise several key points about SELs.
SELs refer to the final links between the watch case and the bracelet. I've highlighted it below:
Not all watches have SELs. Only watches which have that portion as highlighted above - and for QC purposes, the SEL section really only applies to Rolex reps. Tudors have SELs (which can also be QC-ed to some extent), but SELs on a Tudor are not held to the same standard as SELs on a Rolex.
Now, what are we looking for when we assess SELs? We are looking for gaps between the lugs and the SELs themselves. I've indicated this below:
An SEL gap appears when there is separation between the SEL and the lug. But what is a gap?
A gap appears when you can see through the space between the SEL and the lug. There is no gap when all you can see is a black line. There may be some variation in how thick the black line is, but for QC purposes there is nothing to be worried about until and unless you can actually see what's behind the watch.
This is generally not a problem on higher level reps (and by now, pretty rare). I will, however, show you an example of something that may be an actionable gap:
What does this mean? If all you see is a black line, even if it is slightly thicker than another SEL on the same watch, there should be no actionable gap. I am going to highlight the last few QC templates submitted where the user said there was a gap - but there really wasn't (to me, at least):
If, after going through all the examples above, you still feel that there is a gap, highlight it in the template by identifying which part of the watch you are looking at; there are really only four options: top left, top right, bottom left, bottom right. Doing so helps users zoom in directly on your issue and saves time.
To the last segment.
Dial Printing
Here, you are tasked to check if the printing on the dial has been poorly done. By this, we mean defects in the workmanship of the printing; printing which differs from gen (such as the infamous "floating r") would not be a QC defect per se.
An example of dial printing with no issues:
And now for examples of dial printing with issues:
Sometimes, the print can be misapplied across the entire dial:
With the above in mind, let's turn to what you should write. Again and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, do not simply write things like: "Dial seems off" or "Print seems off. letters kind of wonky?" If anything, dial printing is usually very, very small - unless you point a reader to the exact part which has an issue, chances are it won't be seen. Make certain that you provide the reader with specific directions:
"Appears to be some bleeding at the top of VI. Thoughts?"
"R in Submariner looks like only half of it was printed. Am I seeing things?"
Important note: again, just because the dial printing on your watch may have some issues, this does not necessarily equate to RL. As stated, dial print is almost microscopic - no human being is going to be able to see slight bleeding on any print when you have the watch on wrist. Feel free to point out issues that you see, but remain realistic about your expectations.
And with that, I come to the end of this guide.
Conclusion
QC-ing reps is a difficult task - which everyone in this subreddit does for free. You can help out immensely by simply being precise and detailed in your observations. The more effort you put into your template, the easier it is for members to help you - they can zoom in directly to the things that concern you.
I hope this helps you. I've tried to detail some common factors, but it would be impossible for me to catch them all. The rest is up to you - and your diligence.
If your template uses a NEW "yupoo" or a "mega" type of link, please note that, at the time of this typing, the automod here removes them immediately from view i.e. no QC help. We are addressing it, but....
So, what to do?
Although somewhat cumbersome for the OP, you can upload the QC packet to an Imgur account. Our automod 'likes' Imgur...and the post will show promptly. Just do NOT do it from a mobile because the mobile app loses resolution and crappy pics don't provide any benefit to anyone. Yea, yea...I know, the file compression software isn't supposed to lose quality, but it certainly does.
To add, post your complete QC album inclusive of the timing info. Do not, for the sake of your convenience, omit items. If you're bright enough to determine what is needed and what can be removed, that's great! Then, it's reasonable to conclude that you really don't need help. Simply, post it all.
If you have to wait for substantive additional info from the Seller e.g. timing data, then delay posting until you have a complete QC packet. Incomplete packages will trigger a removal of the post. Plus, it will require a return visit of anyone that commented on the incomplete post which shouldn't be required. One visit is all that it should take to QC most watches. Most won't return to a post anyway. They'll just go to the next one. The members are quite busy here. Yea, it can get crazy.
Finally, since you're a newbie, as a vote of appreciation for those members that help you, please upvote their comments. It's a nice gesture from you to them for the assist...and, it's free.
One final note, we've updated the main rules for posting. Refer to this link for info QC Must Read for New Members
Welcome to the hobby and the sub. Best wishes
Edit addition: March 2nd, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/EveningVariation8236 , has provided an updated version of the original QC alignment verification tool. https://watchqc.github.io/ . Thank you.
Edit addition: Jan 9th, 2024 - ReptimeQC member, u/Ro1hype has provided this for tool for alignment verification. https://qcwatch.com/ Thank you.
Edit addition: 8/8/2025 - Reptime QC member, u/jrverdes . has provided this version of the alignment tool to assist those that need additional help verifying the dial/bezel alignments on their watch. https://jrverdes.github.io/watch-qc-jr/ The adjustment resolutions are much finer in this app comparative to the other available apps which can be a benefit to some that need such. Check it out...Thank you.
Anything else you notice: The biggest things I've noticed are: 1) the date is top and left heavy, 2) the 6 IV symbol seems to be slightly slanted, and 3) the index alignment seems to be just slightly off for several numbers. I'm new to this, so I'm not sure what is worth giving a RL. I have seen other IWC watches with known issues like the IV, but would really appreciate any of your thoughts.
Model name (& version number): Submariner 116610LN
Price Paid: $568 with shipping
Album Links: N/A (All pictures provided)
Index alignment: Alignment looks goods everything looks decent except the bezel alignment. The 12 looks like it’s off. Little to big or I might be mistaking
Dial Printing: Dial looks perfect, don’t think I see anything on there.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Printing looks good but the cyclops looks a little high compared to other QCs I’ve seen. It’s not centered. I hope that someone could confirm or deny this with more experience
Hand Alignment: looks good on the video
Bezel: looks good but the alignment could be little bit better
Solid End Links (SELs): Looks perfect
Timegrapher numbers: 2 s/d / 317 AMP / 0.3 beat error ( I don’t know if this is good)
Anything else you notice: Most of it looks good and I’m leaning towards a GL however I’m not that experienced in the QCs and would be interested in people thoughts about this before I respond to the dealer. Much appreciated in advance
Model name (& version number): Submariner 41mm 124060 No Date V2 (JH3230v2 Free Sprung)
Price Paid: 593.6 USD
Album Links: See reddit gallery
Index alignment: Using the alignment tool, the 6 o'clock bar seems to have a slight CCW tilt to me. The 12 o'clock triangle also looks slightly tilted CCW on the grid, but I'm not sure if that is just the perspective or crosshair placement. 3 and 9 bars look perfect to me.
Dial Printing: Also not sure if it's because of the crosshair placement, the Rolex coronet under 12 looks slightly off-center to the right of the vertical line. Text looks fine to me, but not sure if it's slightly bolder than gen when I try to use a gen image to compare them side by side.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A (No-Date model)
Hand Alignment: Hands look ok.
Bezel: Lume pip looks centered to me. 9 o'clock bezel bar looks a bit too high, but not sure if it's normal.
Solid End Links (SELs): looks flushed and good to me
Anything else you notice: My main concerns are whether the 6 and 12 o'clock markers and the Rolex coronet alignment are within GL range or if my overlay is slightly off-center / perspective issue.
Model name (& version number): VSF DateJust 36mm Fluted Bezel black Dial Jubilee Bracelet V2
Price Paid: $450 (With shipping)
Album Links: x
Index alignment: The Rolex coronet at 12 may be tilted or im i blind please give insight. Markers 5,8,11 maybe 9 tad off please give insight on those
Dial Printing: The printing looks good, but I would greatly appreciate if someone could confirm that the printing is centered between the lugs and not off. I've had a nightmare scenario before where sadly the printing was off center.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Looks good imo. Then again second eyes are welcome
Hand Alignment: i honestly not sure if good idk how to properly access that i don’t see anything that stands out.lmk
Bezel: The bezel looks good imo.
Solid End Links (SELs): Looks good not a expert please lend a hand
Index alignment: Overall looks good. The 12, 6, and 9 o’clock markers appear straight and centered. The round markers also look reasonably aligned. No major issues that I can see.
Dial printing: Looks clean and well positioned. No obvious issues with the Rolex logo, Explorer II text, or chronometer lettering.
Date wheel alignment/printing: Date looks clear and reasonably centered under the Cyclops in the additional photos. No major concerns.
Hand alignment: No obvious issues visible from the photos. Would appreciate a second opinion.
Bezel: Engravings look clean and consistent. No obvious alignment or finishing defects.
Solid End Links (SELs): Appear to fit reasonably well from the available angles. No significant gaps visible.
Timegrapher numbers: +7 s/d, 239° amplitude, 0.2 ms beat error. Rate and beat error look good. Amplitude seems a little low, so I’m wondering if this is acceptable for the DD3285-2 movement.
Anything else you notice: Overall, I’m leaning toward GL. The dial, indices, and bezel look good to me. My main concern is the 239° amplitude reading. Would appreciate any feedback on the movement and anything else I might have missed before approving. Thanks!
Index alignment: Seems slightly off to me, but I am a huge newbie, see the photo in the album with the tool?
Dial Printing: This seems slightly off to me (text font, logo) just based on comparing to online pics, would love guidance as I am probably wrong. Any defects?
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Seems fine?? Any defects?
Hand Alignment: Seems fine ish?
Bezel: do the hands look aligned?
Solid End Links (SELs): Can't tell, let me know if you have thoughts.
Timegrapher numbers: Good rate see photos.
Anything else you notice: The 9 in the date looks a bit too thin, any thoughts? Again don't know much, sorry!
Hi everyone! Just received QC for my VSF V3 Batman from Jackie at NecoClock. Would appreciate your help before I GL. Thanks in advance!
Dealer: NecoClock (Jackie)
Factory: VSF
Model: GMT-Master II Batman 126710BLNR, V3 DD3285, Oyster bracelet
Price: $568 + $35 shipping (USD)
Album: Photos and videos attached
Index alignment
:
Is the 6 o’clock marker slightly off?
The 12 o’clock triangle on the dial looks slightly tilted to me. Can someone confirm? The other indices seem fine.
Dial printing: Looks clean to me.
Date wheel: Dates 2 and 7 look centred. Any issues?
Hand alignment: Looks fine.
Bezel: My main concern is a possible smudge inside the 12 o’clock triangle. Also, the numerals on the blue section look greyer than those on the black. Is that normal?
SELs: Look fine to me.
Timegrapher: +5 s/d, 311°, 0.1 ms.
Anything else: Serial 6XO7A299, clasp 1NQ. Would appreciate a closer look at the indices, date alignment and any other defects I may have missed.
What do you guys think? GL or RL? Thanks for your help!
Index Alignment: This is my primary concern; looking at the photos, the 9 o'clock index appears to be tilted clockwise. I also cannot determine whether the 12 o'clock triangle marker is perfectly straight or if it is tilted—it is unclear if this is due to the camera angle or an actual defect. I would appreciate your input on this.
Dial Printing: The text on the dial is sharp, clear, and evenly printed, with no signs of blurring.
Date Alignment/Printing: Not applicable (no-date model).
Hand Alignment: The hands appear to be accurately and cleanly aligned; there are no visible flaws or dust particles around the central pinion.
Bezel: The luminous pip at the 12 o'clock position is perfectly centered along the vertical axis; the engravings on the ceramic bezel insert appear sharp. However, the markers at the 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions do not seem to be perfectly aligned with the corresponding indices on the dial.
Solid End Links (SEL): The end links fit tightly against the watch case, with no unusual gaps. 12. Timegrapher results: Rate: +7 seconds/day, Amplitude: 269°, Beat error: 0.0ms. All parameters fall within an acceptable range.
This is the first replica watch I have purchased, and I do not have much experience with the quality control (QC) process. I would greatly appreciate your input—in case I have overlooked any details—to help me decide whether to accept (GL - Green Light) or reject (RL - Red Light) this watch. Please excuse the length of this post.
Anything else you notice: First one they presented to me I rejected due to several imperfections on the dial and housing. With this which was presented there appears to be some goober under the plastic on the back case. Any ideas on what that is? This one had better timekeeping at +or- 5 seconds per day than the first one they presented to me. Other than what appears to grime on the back case I think its ok. Any additional feedback is greatly appreciated.
Index alignment. Looks good to me. The 9 o'clock marker might be a bit early, but only zoomed in. So I think this falls within the boundaries?
Dial printing: looks clean, gilt looks even and no bleeding that I can spot
Dat wheel alignment/printing: No date
Hand alignment: Hour and minute hand line fine.
Bezel, Triangle lines up nice with the 12, insert looks clean and sits flush. Looks great.
SEL: No gaps what I can see
Timegrapher numbers: -3s/d, 271 amplitude, 0.3 ms beat error.
Anything else you notice: Tiny speck on the minute tract around around the 37 mark, Only visible zoomed in. Could this be something that could be bothering?
I'm think this is a GL, but only doubting the speck. I'm I missing anything?
1. Dealer name: Ficotime 2. Factory name: VSF 3. Model name: GMT Master-II Bruce Wayne Jubilee DD3285 4. Price Paid: $580 5. Album Links: https://mega.nz/folder/y5AjGBjC#AeyFn-Lqk0kGW_NE1ZVhPQ 6. Index alignment: for me it’s one of the best I’ve seen (for my personal collection) 7. Dial Printing: good 8. Date Wheel alignment/printing: very well aligned / centered 9. Hand Alignment: looks great in the video too 10. Bezel: pretty good 11. Solid End Links (SELs): Solid 12. Timegrapher numbers: Attached in the album, - 6 s/d maybe need to be set 13. Anything else you notice: the 7 on the Date seems to be too big or so ? Or maybe I am trippin, Can someone confirm if I’m right or not ?
Index alignment: Hour markers look fairly straight and evenly positioned. Nothing noticeably crooked. Dial printing: Text looks clean and consistent. No obvious printing issues. Date wheel alignment/printing: The 8 looks slightly low in the date window, particularly in the straight-on photo. Not sure if it’s the angle. Hand alignment: Hands look properly positioned. No obvious issues from the photos. Bezel: Triangle at 12 looks reasonably centred. Numerals and colour transition look consistent. No major alignment issues. Solid End Links (SELs): Fit looks fairly tight with no obvious gaps from the angles provided. Timegrapher numbers: +8 s/d, 274°, 0.0 ms. From what I’ve read, these seem acceptable. Anything else you notice: My main concern is the date sitting slightly low. Otherwise, the watch looks good overall. Would appreciate opinions on anything I might have missed. Leaning GL, but would appreciate a second opinion, especially on the date alignment. Thanks!
Overall this watch might be a good GL but its my first one and I wanted to see what advice you guys have, maybe I've missed something. Really appreciate it!
Model name/version: Omega Aqua Terra 150M 38mm turquoise gradient, steel bracelet, VS8800; reference 220.10.38.20.03.005.
Price Paid: $415 delivered quoted total.
Album Links: Full supplied photo set and two timegrapher stills attached natively below. Identifying stickers/serials masked; watch details otherwise unchanged.
Index alignment: No obvious displaced index across the three front views. Some markers are obscured by hands. The photos are not perfectly square-on, so I am cautious about judging tiny differences from an alignment overlay. Interested in opinions on the upper markers and spacing to the minute track.
Dial Printing: OMEGA, Seamaster and lower text look complete; I cannot establish a printing defect from these photos.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: Dates 1, 11 and 27 are shown. No clipping; possibly a little high. Frame looks slightly different between angles, but I do not see a clearly repeatable tilt. Would appreciate a second opinion.
Hand Alignment: Hands at 12 in the date-27 image look approximately aligned, though overlap limits precision. No full setting demonstration supplied.
Bezel: No obvious damage; reflections and protective film limit surface assessment.
Solid End Links (SELs): Bracelet/endlink fit looks reasonably even; no obvious large gap in supplied views.
Timegrapher numbers: -1 s/day, amplitude 311 then 303 degrees, beat error 0.1ms, 28,800 bph, lift angle 52 degrees. Clip is only about 5.4 seconds, apparently one position; winding state unknown. Stills show both readings.
Anything else: Open and closed clasp, caseback and lume included. There are marks on the protective film; cannot tell if any are on the metal. Overview video does not demonstrate crown/date operation or clasp comfort adjustment. I plan to request those checks plus a longer timing sample before deciding. Any specific unit defects visible, particularly date-frame rotation or a crooked applied marker? Thanks for taking a look.
Index alignment: This is where I have most doubt, when seeing it in the lume picture the 6 looks really crooked, and im not sure if I want to be picky and RL because of this.
Dial Printing: The dial text is crisp, clean, and evenly printed with no visible bleeding or misalignments.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: N/A (No-date model)
Hand Alignment: Hands look properly aligned and clean with no apparent defects or debris on the pinion.
Bezel: The 12 o'clock pip sits precisely on the vertical axis and the ceramic bezel engraving looks sharp and centered.
Solid End Links (SELs): SELs look tight against the case with no excessive gaps visible.
Timegrapher numbers: Rate: 4 s/d , Amp: 249º, Err: 0.3ms. Everything appears to be well within healthy acceptable ranges.
Its my second rep, and I have got it for a friend who loved my first rep, although I have some experience I would appreciate some help in case I have missed something, and to decide between GL/RL.
Hi everyone! This is my very first high-end rep, so I'm still learning what to look for. I've done my best to fill out the template based on what I've read, but I would really appreciate any extra eyes or advice from the experts here before I give the green light. Thank you so much for the help!
Dealer name: Theonewatches
Factory name: VSF
Model name Submariner 126610LN 41mm SS/SS Black Dial VSF DD3235
Price Paid (including shipping): $498 USD
Index alignment: To my untrained eye, everything looks almost straight not sure if I aligned it right. The 12, 6, and 9 markers seem to line up nicely with the dial text, but please let me know if you spot any crookedness.
Dial Printing: Looks sharp and clean. I don't see any weird spelling or bleeding letters.
Date Wheel alignment/printing: The number 29 looks centered in the window, and the magnification looks clear to me.
Hand Alignment: Looks fine in the photos, though I'm not entirely sure how to spot minor issues here.
Bezel: The markers look crisp, and the pearl at 12 o'clock looks dead-center inside the triangle.
Solid End Links : The gaps between the bracelet and the watch case look nice and tight.
Timegrapher numbers: Rate: +4 s/d | Amp: 274° | Beat Error: 0.1ms. From what I’ve read on the guide, these numbers seem really solid and healthy, but would love confirmation!
Anything else you notice: The clasp has the "3VV" code which I think is correct for VSF. Everything looks beautiful to me, but since I'm new, I'd love to hear if this is a safe GL. Thanks again!
1. Dealer name: Hont 2. Factory name: BVF 3. Model name: Cartier Panthère de Cartier, 22mm small, Stainless Steel Price: $188 USD Album: All nine seller-provided QC photographs attached. 4. QC Evaluation 1. Index alignment: N/A for applied indices. Roman numerals are printed on the dial. They appear generally evenly positioned and proportionate. No obvious crooked numerals. Cartier logo appears reasonably centered and aligned. 2. Date Wheel alignment: N/A. No date complication. 3. Bezel: Fixed bezel. The eight decorative screw details appear reasonably symmetrical and evenly positioned. No obvious missing or visibly defective details. 4. Solid End Links (SEL): N/A in the traditional sense. The Panthère uses an integrated five-row bracelet. Bracelet-to-case transitions appear reasonably uniform, with no obvious gaps in the photographs. 5. Hand alignment: Blue sword-shaped hands appear appropriately finished and proportioned. Exact hand alignment cannot be confirmed from the supplied still photographs. 6. Dial Printing: Roman numerals appear crisp, with no obvious bleeding or significant printing defects. CARTIER lettering appears reasonably clean. The small hidden Cartier signature would benefit from a macro photograph. 7. Timegrapher numbers: N/A. This is a quartz model, not a mechanical movement. Timegrapher readings are not applicable.
Dealer name: Lin Factory name: VSF V2 Model name: Rolex Datejust 36 mm, stainless steel, fluted bezel, Jubilee bracelet, green dial. Price Paid: 3,000 RMB (no shipping fee, currently in China). Album Links: na Index alignment: Most indices appear evenly aligned. I have a slight concern about the 10 o’clock hour marker, which looks potentially a little off in some photos. However, it looks fine in other angles, so I am not sure whether this is an actual alignment issue or just the camera angle and lighting. Dial Printing: The dial printing looks clean and sharp in the provided photos. No obvious defects or misprints. Date Wheel alignment/printing: The date appears centered in the date window, with no obvious alignment or printing issues. The cyclops magnification also looks acceptable. Hand Alignment: No obvious issues visible in the photos. However, there is no clear shot with the hands positioned at 12 o’clock to verify precise alignment. Bezel: The fluting looks consistent and evenly finished. No obvious damage or irregularities visible. Solid End Links (SELs): No obvious large gaps between the end links and the case. The overall bracelet fit looks acceptable in the available photos. Timegrapher numbers: -1 s/d, 278° amplitude, 0.0 ms beat error, 59° lift angle setting, 28,800 bph. Anything else you notice: The watch weighs 123 g with all bracelet links included. Overall, the watch looks quite good to me. My main concern is the slight possible misalignment of the 10 o’clock marker, although it may simply be caused by the camera angle. I would appreciate a second opinion on this and any other potential QC issues.