Did watchmakers use microscopes in the past?

[Incroyable]

Having watched a few Youtube videos of contemporary master watchmakers at work, many seem to make use of optical microscopes or high definition head mounted loupes.

Did watchmakers in the past use rudimentary microscopes or was it all done by daylight? Indeed was watchmaking ever done by candlelight?

Were eye loupes more or less the same quality in the days of Arnold and Breguet as they are today?

 

[gmorse]

Hi Jeffery,

If you look at photos of 19th century workshops, you'll see that they typically had very large, often north-facing windows, allowing the maximum amount of natural light to enter. There are some older paintings showing water-filled glass globes being used to concentrate the light of candles or oil lamps on work areas, but I'm not aware of any that specifically show watchmaking activities. I will now await a flood of images arriving showing just this activity!

Others with more knowledge of the history of microscopy will no doubt be able to provide some detail on their use; dissecting microscopes with their larger working distances would be more appropriate for watch work.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Bernhard J.]

Children made fusee chains by the light coming in the window.
I don't recall ever seeeig an image of a watchmaker at a microscope back in the day.
Loupes haven't got any better, no.

According to a recently purchased antiquarian booklett dealing specifically with fusee chain making (including lists of makers and their age), these were raraley made by children, but mainly by adult women, often in home work.

I personally am used to working with a conventional eye loupe and still do so today. At least when young, this was fully sufficient, even in case of wrist watch movements. In the meanwhile something better would sometimes be nice, due to (my) age.

Cheers, Bernhard

 

[gmorse]

Hi Bernhard,

They certainly weren't children but young women, from around 15 years old. The attached pdf is two local newspaper articles, (with the usual journalistic misunderstanding of technical matters), about Rose Andrews, the last of these ladies, who died in the late 1960s.

Regards,

Graham

 

[Incroyable]

Hi Jeffery,

If you look at photos of 19th century workshops, you'll see that they typically had very large, often north-facing windows, allowing the maximum amount of natural light to enter. There are some older paintings showing water-filled glass globes being used to concentrate the light of candles or oil lamps on work areas, but I'm not aware of any that specifically show watchmaking activities. I will now await a flood of images arriving showing just this activity!

Others with more knowledge of the history of microscopy will no doubt be able to provide some detail on their use; dissecting microscopes with their larger working distances would be more appropriate for watch work.

Regards,

Graham

I found this high resolution photo of the Audemars Piguet workshop in what was probably the late 1930s or early 1940s. From the equipment it looks little changed from the 19th century save for what I assume are electric machines?

A unique watch from 1943

When Jules Louis Audemars and Edward Auguste Piguet opened their first workshop in 1875, they immediately adopted the chronograph mechanism.

www.audemarspiguet.com

 

[gmorse]

Hi Jeffrey,

I found this high resolution photo of the Audemars Piguet workshop in what was probably the late 1930s or early 1940s. From the equipment it looks little changed from the 19th century save for what I assume are electric machines?

Yes, it's very little different from the small 19th century workshops in Prescot, apart from the evident quality of the building. There the buildings were little more than sheds and the machines were mostly worked by treadles under the benches rather than overhead shafting, but similar larger than average windows were in evidence.



These show the last days of the Joseph Preston workshop in Prescot shortly before it was demolished in the 1950s following the death of the last proprietor and eventually sole worker there, Harry Pybus.

When considering the exquisite craftsmanship of the watch movements they produced, it is hardly credible that such things could have been made in this building.

Regards,

Graham

 

[eri231]

The driving force was outside the laboratory and with transmission shafts carried into the ceiling and leather straps they operated the equipment. Before electric current steam was used, before that, the richest laboratories used a wheel driven by oxen. The poorer ones used the workers who took turns pushing the wheel.
Regards enrico

 

[Incroyable]

Tangentially it's interesting how watchmaking and its associated crafts like casemaking have become rather prestigious occupations in contemporary times.

In the recent past such occupations would have been if not lower class certainly working class. I recall reading a short essay on how Sidney Better was crafting tourbillons and such in a one room council estate somewhere in 1920s London.

 

[Wimberleytech]

Watches tend to scale with time. Consider the movements of the 19th century compared to modern ones. Today I am working on a Seiko 3302 "transistorized" movement. Most of the work I do with a loupe, but dealing with the leaf switch on this beast...I use a microscope.

 

[Bernhard J.]

Hi Bernhard,

They certainly weren't children but young women, from around 15 years old. The attached pdf is two local newspaper articles, (with the usual journalistic misunderstanding of technical matters), about Rose Andrews, the last of these ladies, who died in the late 1960s.

Regards,

Graham

The book about chain making, which I recently had acquired, comprises a long interview with Rose Andrews

Interestingly, the lists of chain makers comprise a few men also.

 

[John Matthews]

I believe you are mistaken in assuming that children were not involved in the manufacture of fusee chains. I think the conclusion is based on the statement in the Rose Andrews interview. The quote is

Mrs. Andrews said she found it hard to believe reports that workhouse child labour was used in the early​

days of the industry. "Children would not have had the patience to do it, would they?" she asked.​

​

Although it was hard for her to believe, Sue Newman's booklet on the 'Christchurch fusee Chain Gang' includes this ...

I have seen a number of other references to the use of child labour in the manufacture of fusee chains and I believe it to be true. I think it unsurprising that Rose made the statement in 1966 which was likely influenced by the patience of children in the post WW2 era. I suspect that children at the end of the C18th & beginning of the C19th were required to have more patience, they would have little choice in the matter.

John

 

[eri231]

L'infanzia infernale nell'Inghilterra dell'800 - Focus.it

Per molti bambini e adolescenti sfruttati nell'Inghilterra della Rivoluzione industriale, l'infanzia e l'adolescenza erano un inferno.

www-focus-it.translate.goog

Regards enrico

 

[gmorse]

Hi John,

In the times you're referring to, child labour certainly wasn't confined to the chain-making trade. It was common across many industries, in the mines, cotton and woollen mills, and many others.

Regards,

Graham

 

[rstl99]

To come back to the original question, there are engravings of old watchmakers at work in the eighteenth century, and many of them are represented using small magnifying lenses mounted on a stand to assist them in viewing small details. The one below is an engraving of Abraham-Louis Perrelet du Locle (1729-1826), at work on a set of turns, where he is obviously at an advanced age and in need of magnification (in addition to the corrective glasses he is also wearing). The stand-mounted loupe also has the advantage of leaving both hands free to operate the bow and the graver.

Bear in mind that there was great interest (and significant developments) in optical instruments during the seventeenth century (Huygens being only one of many early key players). Optics were used for astronomical purposes through novel telescopes, but also for more microscopic uses. All that to say that loupes and optical aides like the one showed on the engraving of Perrelet were probably widely used, throughout the eighteenth century. And certainly by the time Breguet started making watches, there would have been excellent optical aides available.

As Graham indicated, good natural light was of paramount importance given no suitable artificial light sources at that time, but especially for older watchmakers, optical aids were no doubt as important then as they are now. Younger watchmakers, fresh from their apprenticeships, were probably able to get by with their excellent young eyesight for many years, but fine work on small parts no doubt needed at least occasional optical magnification.

Robert

 

[Dr. Jon]

One factor in the development of visual aids is the development of optical design.
In the late 1700's Hall and DOlland developed color corrected lenses, primarily for marine spyglasses and Gentlemen's observing telescopes.

Optical design of microscopes began with Zeiss in the late 1800's and those methods spread to all areas of optical design.

These microscopes were well corrected but were designed and built for high magnification and very small fields of view. They appled to watchmaking only for metallurgical analysis.

Surgery especially eye surgery led to long working distance medium to low magnification stereo -,microscopes in the 1950's. These were too expensive for watch makers. Smaller less expensove stereo zoom microscope came in I think in the 1960 and were in use in many labs in for industrial inspection. . They were facilitated by the development of the zoom objective which could be made binocular. I saw a lot of tehse in dsay work but never in a watch or clock shop until recently. Cost have come way down due to Chinese manufacture and the availability of surplus form the industrial work we sent abroad.

BY the 80's and 90's dentists were using stereo loupes and I found them very useful for watch work. By then my eyes were far less capable than they were in my youth. Cost also came way down. I have a few dental loupes and I got some use from them but found the working distances are too large and getting good lighting has been a problem. Stereo microscope on a boom mount combine hands free use, good magnification range and working distance with ease of getting the light I need.


In my experience, I would not have seen much need for such a microscope in my youth. Young eyes have a wide accomodation range. Until I was in my 20's I saw no need for a magnifier and wondered what the fuss was about. I could see anything with my bare eyes I could see under a magnifier. No longer.

I believe older watch makers and smaller watches and the development of very high end watchmaking led to the adoption of microscopy in watchmaking. I recall a marketing guy at one of these high end makers telling me that their watches were amde to be examined under a 20X magnifier while the more famous brand was intended only for 5 x viewing.

Before the 1980's, only watchmakers looked at wristwatch movements.

 

[Incroyable]

Given the sheer amount of black polishing and anglage in high end 19th century movements have I'd be surprised if there weren't optical aids involved.

Some of the finishing is still finer than the very high end watches made today. I believe Patek stamps out bevels and anglage in their more entry level movements and then hand finishes them though I've read a few complaints on how they aren't "perfect" when examined under a loupe.

I wonder if black polishing a spring detent requires optical aids?

 

[FreetzGrün]

"Did watchmakers use microscopes in the past?"


I consider watch manufacturers to be watchmakers, and they were certainly using microscopes during the process in the 1950's.
One was the Hauser Measuring Microscope, Brügg Switzerland. It was used for Measuring wheels, pinions, cutters, etc.
I have some photos of it in action in my collection I'll have to dig up

 

[Incroyable]

Before the 1980's, only watchmakers looked at wristwatch movements.

My impression is that wristwatches weren't really considered "collectible" prior to the 1980s. Collectors only collected pocket watches.

 

[DeweyC]

One factor in the development of visual aids is the development of optical design.
In the late 1700's Hall and DOlland developed color corrected lenses, primarily for marine spyglasses and Gentlemen's observing telescopes.

Optical design of microscopes began with Zeiss in the late 1800's and those methods spread to all areas of optical design.

These microscopes were well corrected but were designed and built for high magnification and very small fields of view. They appled to watchmaking only for metallurgical analysis.

Surgery especially eye surgery led to long working distance medium to low magnification stereo -,microscopes in the 1950's. These were too expensive for watch makers. Smaller less expensove stereo zoom microscope came in I think in the 1960 and were in use in many labs in for industrial inspection. . They were facilitated by the development of the zoom objective which could be made binocular. I saw a lot of tehse in dsay work but never in a watch or clock shop until recently. Cost have come way down due to Chinese manufacture and the availability of surplus form the industrial work we sent abroad.

BY the 80's and 90's dentists were using stereo loupes and I found them very useful for watch work. By then my eyes were far less capable than they were in my youth. Cost also came way down. I have a few dental loupes and I got some use from them but found the working distances are too large and getting good lighting has been a problem. Stereo microscope on a boom mount combine hands free use, good magnification range and working distance with ease of getting the light I need.


In my experience, I would not have seen much need for such a microscope in my youth. Young eyes have a wide accomodation range. Until I was in my 20's I saw no need for a magnifier and wondered what the fuss was about. I could see anything with my bare eyes I could see under a magnifier. No longer.

I believe older watch makers and smaller watches and the development of very high end watchmaking led to the adoption of microscopy in watchmaking. I recall a marketing guy at one of these high end makers telling me that their watches were amde to be examined under a 20X magnifier while the more famous brand was intended only for 5 x viewing.

Before the 1980's, only watchmakers looked at wristwatch movements.

We had a discussion about this in the long dead "Syracuse Listserv" in 1995. This list was comprised of international curators, collectors and restoration folk.

We looked at the maps of London in the late 18th Century and concluded that the scientists and mechanics of the day more than likely met at local pubs where they shared expertise and solutions. I have no doubt that the leading watchmakers of the day used the most advanced technical aids. What they were would be hidden in the histories of technology (remember the accurate screw for micrometers was a 19th century invention).

(A LOT of good information lost from the days before trolling became a sport). And my archive disk was lost long ago. Sigh.

I DO have a campyloscope from the late19th century that uses a monocular microscope. This is a factory tool used to check the terminal curves of a Breguet spring against an enlarged master drawing. So the use of a mono microscope likely predates that instrument.

Perhaps the inventories of Earnshaw, Arnold, Breguet etc would yield information.

 

[Dr. Jon]

Chapuis book on Swiss technology shows an optical comparitor being used to look at gears.

 

[SKennedy]

We looked at the maps of London in the late 18th Century and concluded that the scientists and mechanics of the day more than likely met at local pubs where they shared expertise and solutions.

I can confirm that the watch and clockmakers of today sometimes meet in London pubs, particularly on the eve of an AHS lecture...

Regarding magnification, I have an unsubstantiated theory that some of the best early watchmakers might have had the natural advantage of short sightedness.

 

[jboger]

If one does a google image search for jewelers lamp, you may find pictures of multi-faceted oil lamps that burned either alcohol or kerosene. Because these lamps had multiple flat sides, they could be used in variety of positions. I know some date back to the 19th C (kerosene did not become common until the 1850s) These were work lights used both as a light and heat source to, for example, melt shellac. I think they are still used. I once had one but never used it that much.

 

[Rich Newman]

Before Ahasuerus Fromanteel became a clock maker and before he introduced the pendulum to England in1658, he was well known as a craftsmen and also one of the best English glass blowers for making optics for instruments / telescopes for men of science if I'm remembering correctly (the book you will want to read was published 4 or 5 years ago, "Innovation & Collaboration" by Garnier & Hollis). Hard to imagine that the top London-based clock and watchmakers didn't find magnification useful, if they could afford it, so I think its highly likely that Tompion's shop and others did. Just my guess.

 

[Dr. Jon]

Don't know about horology but the book I am reading about Turner mentions that in miniaturists in teh late 1700's used magnifying glasses.

Color correction comes into optics in the late 1700's but it it used for long focus telescope lenses.


It is not untilthe late 1800's the optical theory is well enough estabished that really good magnifiers