Discussion Forum > Analog vs Digital Watch Faces
Don't most people have both? I wear an analogue watch which I keep accurate within a couple of seconds, but also consult my phone's digital clock frequently (as well as using it as alarm, timer and stopwatch). And for really accurate time I use http://time.is/ on my phone.
March 15, 2016 at 11:05 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I sort of 'collect' watches and alternate between wearing the analogue and digital. I have a particular fondness for 'retro' Casios and the like from '70s and '80s.
March 15, 2016 at 12:07 |
Neil Cumming
Neil Cumming
Neil Cumming:
<< I have a particular fondness for 'retro' Casios and the like from '70s and '80s. >>
OMG, that takes me back!
<< I have a particular fondness for 'retro' Casios and the like from '70s and '80s. >>
OMG, that takes me back!
March 15, 2016 at 13:27 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Dad wrote the national time signal number by the phone. We had no excuse for not having accurate watches!
Reading and drawing analog clocks is a useful exercise. This article summarizes part of the history of the Arrowsmith program for people with learning disabilities:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/books-and-media/the-woman-who-changed-her-brain-barbara-arrowsmith-young/article4225057/
Reading and drawing analog clocks is a useful exercise. This article summarizes part of the history of the Arrowsmith program for people with learning disabilities:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/books-and-media/the-woman-who-changed-her-brain-barbara-arrowsmith-young/article4225057/
March 15, 2016 at 13:37 |
Cricket
Cricket
[Afternote: I wrote this comment before seeing Cricket's above post about clock-faces]
A further question:
I noticed in the comments to the second article that one reader said that analogue was slower because he had to read the hour hand, then the minute hand, and then the second hand.
That made me wonder whether people brought up in the digital age are slower at reading analogue timepieces than those, like me, who were brought up long before digital ones were available. I certainly don't have to "read" the dial at all, let alone in some sort of order. I just glance at it and immediately know what the time is.
However if I had to vocalize the time I would I be slower with an analogue clock than with a digital clock, and I'd phrase it differently. "12.45" for instance would become "a quarter to one".
And being ex-military I have no problem with times like 17.45, but my wife insists that when I write her a note I put 5.45 pm.
When I was in stationed in Germany in the mid-60s, we were warned not to get caught out by the fact that in German "halb neun" means half past eight, not half past nine!
A further question:
I noticed in the comments to the second article that one reader said that analogue was slower because he had to read the hour hand, then the minute hand, and then the second hand.
That made me wonder whether people brought up in the digital age are slower at reading analogue timepieces than those, like me, who were brought up long before digital ones were available. I certainly don't have to "read" the dial at all, let alone in some sort of order. I just glance at it and immediately know what the time is.
However if I had to vocalize the time I would I be slower with an analogue clock than with a digital clock, and I'd phrase it differently. "12.45" for instance would become "a quarter to one".
And being ex-military I have no problem with times like 17.45, but my wife insists that when I write her a note I put 5.45 pm.
When I was in stationed in Germany in the mid-60s, we were warned not to get caught out by the fact that in German "halb neun" means half past eight, not half past nine!
March 15, 2016 at 13:45 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
No no no you naive realists: "time [is] the experience of waiting for a lump of sugar to dissolve in a glass of water."
- http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/science-vs-philosophy-and-the-meaning-of-time/6539568
- http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/science-vs-philosophy-and-the-meaning-of-time/6539568
March 15, 2016 at 17:46 |
michael
michael
Interesting comment from artistmike on the watchuseek forum:
"This is an interesting question in many ways and I would suggest this little experiment anyone can try which will prove how people use watches.
The next time you see someone look at their watch, wait a few seconds, then ask them what the time is. I will bet you, 99 times out of a hundred they will look at their watch again to tell you what the time is.
Why?
I have read research that shows the majority of people prefer analogue watches because we don't actually look at a watch to see what the time is, we look to see how long it is till something. Or since something. And for that usage an analogue watch works far better visually, as we don't have to make any mathematical computations. The person you have asked has therefore just worked out time differentials, not looked to see what the time is."
"This is an interesting question in many ways and I would suggest this little experiment anyone can try which will prove how people use watches.
The next time you see someone look at their watch, wait a few seconds, then ask them what the time is. I will bet you, 99 times out of a hundred they will look at their watch again to tell you what the time is.
Why?
I have read research that shows the majority of people prefer analogue watches because we don't actually look at a watch to see what the time is, we look to see how long it is till something. Or since something. And for that usage an analogue watch works far better visually, as we don't have to make any mathematical computations. The person you have asked has therefore just worked out time differentials, not looked to see what the time is."
March 15, 2016 at 22:34 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
And this comment from chascomm:
"I think perhaps the question is not "what is time?", but rather, "what is time used for?" (or "for what is time used?" to all the grammar trolls).
You may perceive time as linear, however that is only relevant to watch design if you were given a digital chronograph at the moment of your birth and watched the time endlessly accumulate for the rest of your life. Functionally, your life is a series of cycles; of sleeping and waking, going to work and going home, eating at the right intervalls, etc. The sun goes up, the sun goes down, the seasons march around and around, and our actions are modified cyclically in response to these.
That said, there is nothing inherently intuitive in any timekeeping interface. Digital, analogue, sun & moon, wandering-hour, differential dial, binary, sundial, water-clock, etc. These are all systems that we learn in order to get on with doing the useful things in our life.
For me, the conventional analogue 12-hour dial works best. Digital is OK too, but for that I prefer 24 hour time. My eldest son struggles with analogue, so I bought him a digital. My youngest son prefers hands on a dial. Just personal preference."
"I think perhaps the question is not "what is time?", but rather, "what is time used for?" (or "for what is time used?" to all the grammar trolls).
You may perceive time as linear, however that is only relevant to watch design if you were given a digital chronograph at the moment of your birth and watched the time endlessly accumulate for the rest of your life. Functionally, your life is a series of cycles; of sleeping and waking, going to work and going home, eating at the right intervalls, etc. The sun goes up, the sun goes down, the seasons march around and around, and our actions are modified cyclically in response to these.
That said, there is nothing inherently intuitive in any timekeeping interface. Digital, analogue, sun & moon, wandering-hour, differential dial, binary, sundial, water-clock, etc. These are all systems that we learn in order to get on with doing the useful things in our life.
For me, the conventional analogue 12-hour dial works best. Digital is OK too, but for that I prefer 24 hour time. My eldest son struggles with analogue, so I bought him a digital. My youngest son prefers hands on a dial. Just personal preference."
March 15, 2016 at 22:48 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Mark: <OMG, that takes me back!>
Lol. Still wear my Casio calculator all the time. (Which, incidentally, is the exact model Marty McFly wears in BTTF)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Casio-Unisex-Digital-Display-CA-53W-1ER/dp/B000GB1R7S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1458088625&sr=8-1&keywords=casio+calculator+watch
My favourite is the incomparable Casio Databank.
Lol. Still wear my Casio calculator all the time. (Which, incidentally, is the exact model Marty McFly wears in BTTF)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Casio-Unisex-Digital-Display-CA-53W-1ER/dp/B000GB1R7S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1458088625&sr=8-1&keywords=casio+calculator+watch
My favourite is the incomparable Casio Databank.
March 16, 2016 at 0:47 |
Neil
Neil
Neil:
<< Still wear my Casio calculator all the time. >>
I'm pleased to see that it's classified under Amazon Fashion!
<< Still wear my Casio calculator all the time. >>
I'm pleased to see that it's classified under Amazon Fashion!
March 16, 2016 at 1:25 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
For me it's a matter of aesthetics, I only wear watches with analogue faces, and only "real" watches (not an Apple watch with an analogue face).
Mark, don't worry, there are also parts in Germany where people have their difficulties with "halb neun", it's only common in certain parts of Germany (e.g. in Berlin, where I grew up). But it is rather logical: "halb neun" means - worldly translated - "half of nine", means half of the ninth hour aka half past eight.
Mark, don't worry, there are also parts in Germany where people have their difficulties with "halb neun", it's only common in certain parts of Germany (e.g. in Berlin, where I grew up). But it is rather logical: "halb neun" means - worldly translated - "half of nine", means half of the ninth hour aka half past eight.
March 16, 2016 at 22:11 |
Christian G.
Christian G.
Christian G wrote:
<< I only wear watches with analogue faces, and only "real" watches (not an Apple watch with an analogue face). >>
I love the my Pebble Time flexible watch face (or Apple if I could afford it). The flexibility of these smartwatch faces allows me to try some unique analogue faces that I couldn't otherwise, such as:
(1) Slow watch - https://www.slow-watches.com/ - a 24 hr round dial with a single analog hand
(2) Ruler watch - https://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/application/52da7ee9889f5dade50000fc - a linear watch face, like a ruler or an analog bathroom scale dial
(3) Illudere - https://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/application/55f49e7a3cee5fe1dc00001b - shows digits by an optical illusion
<< I only wear watches with analogue faces, and only "real" watches (not an Apple watch with an analogue face). >>
I love the my Pebble Time flexible watch face (or Apple if I could afford it). The flexibility of these smartwatch faces allows me to try some unique analogue faces that I couldn't otherwise, such as:
(1) Slow watch - https://www.slow-watches.com/ - a 24 hr round dial with a single analog hand
(2) Ruler watch - https://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/application/52da7ee9889f5dade50000fc - a linear watch face, like a ruler or an analog bathroom scale dial
(3) Illudere - https://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/application/55f49e7a3cee5fe1dc00001b - shows digits by an optical illusion
March 17, 2016 at 8:56 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
I've had a radio-controlled watch for years (Casio Waveceptor). I could never go back. Far too much of my mental energy was once spent on checking and correcting my watch. Sad, really.
I'm thinking hwo nice it would be to go back to an analogue display. As long as the watch is precisely right, I don't need to be able to read it precisely.
I'm thinking hwo nice it would be to go back to an analogue display. As long as the watch is precisely right, I don't need to be able to read it precisely.
March 17, 2016 at 14:34 |
Chris Cooper
Chris Cooper
My kids took forever to learn "quarter to".
I usually know the hour, roughly, so only have to read the minute hand.
I am comfortable rounding on analog clocks, but not with digital.
Michael B: I agree! I usually think about how much time I have left rather than what time it is.
I usually know the hour, roughly, so only have to read the minute hand.
I am comfortable rounding on analog clocks, but not with digital.
Michael B: I agree! I usually think about how much time I have left rather than what time it is.
March 18, 2016 at 18:20 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket:
Although you're agreeing with a comment I was quoting, I agree with both of you! I look to see how much time I have left before something.
Though I love the more relaxed sense of time that comes with using an analogue watch display, when I'm down to the last minutes and know that someone or something else is exacting about a schedule, I much prefer a digital display that also shows the seconds (and preferably the seconds are displayed with a sweep motion, and not in a tiny font). I get extremely anxious relying on an analogue watch display in situations where minutes and seconds count.
Although you're agreeing with a comment I was quoting, I agree with both of you! I look to see how much time I have left before something.
Though I love the more relaxed sense of time that comes with using an analogue watch display, when I'm down to the last minutes and know that someone or something else is exacting about a schedule, I much prefer a digital display that also shows the seconds (and preferably the seconds are displayed with a sweep motion, and not in a tiny font). I get extremely anxious relying on an analogue watch display in situations where minutes and seconds count.
March 19, 2016 at 22:38 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
The only trust-worthy clocks in our house are digital ones, on phones and computers and cable TV boxes connected to the internet. The analog ones are all cheap. That probably influences me more than my natural inclination. As a kid, I trusted analog watches and the clocks in our house, although not the clocks at friends'. I also knew the relationship between school and house time, most especially what time to leave (home-time) in order to be on time (school-time). (My teacher wasn't impressed when I told her I was on time according to the CBC's weekly time signal.)
March 20, 2016 at 0:54 |
Cricket
Cricket
So I guess the answer to my query above is yes, people who were brought up before digital clocks were widely available can read analogue clocks faster than those who were brought up in the digital age.
March 20, 2016 at 0:59 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
Agreed. I have to analyze an analogue for a couple seconds. This holds true unless I need only the minutes past and have recently checked it.
Agreed. I have to analyze an analogue for a couple seconds. This holds true unless I need only the minutes past and have recently checked it.
March 20, 2016 at 1:53 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Michael B.
<< I have to analyze an analogue for a couple seconds. >>
Whereas for me, who was around 30 when mass-produced digital watches and clocks started to become popular, an analogue clockface isn't something that needs to be read to find out the time. It _is_ the time.
<< I have to analyze an analogue for a couple seconds. >>
Whereas for me, who was around 30 when mass-produced digital watches and clocks started to become popular, an analogue clockface isn't something that needs to be read to find out the time. It _is_ the time.
March 20, 2016 at 9:20 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
If I see an analogue clock face I see the time, and the duration to whatever it is which made me look at the clock, without any thinking, it's just there like seeing a colour and knowing it's that colour with no thinking required. If I see a digital time it's also instant but I notice that I've immediately 'seen' the analogue equivalent in my head. It's as if the digital readout triggers the analogue mental image, and the mental image is what's used to see the time.
This 'conversion' is immediate, and, thinking about it, I notice that I can't NOT see the analogue equivalent. Eg it's now 19:10 on my computer, and when I read that I mentally, for a split second, see an hour hand which is 5 hours away from midnight, and that gives me the sense of how late in the day it is, which is why I glanced at the time on the computer.
Maybe it comes down to which ones you were most exposed to as a child when you're still forming patterns. Maybe something to do with language areas in the brain. Just as English is natural and French is still something I have to manually process. I grew up with analogue clocks and watches. The first digital watch I saw later on had red 7-segment LEDs, and I had a radio clock which had a blue-green 7-segment vaccum fluorescent display.
Chris
This 'conversion' is immediate, and, thinking about it, I notice that I can't NOT see the analogue equivalent. Eg it's now 19:10 on my computer, and when I read that I mentally, for a split second, see an hour hand which is 5 hours away from midnight, and that gives me the sense of how late in the day it is, which is why I glanced at the time on the computer.
Maybe it comes down to which ones you were most exposed to as a child when you're still forming patterns. Maybe something to do with language areas in the brain. Just as English is natural and French is still something I have to manually process. I grew up with analogue clocks and watches. The first digital watch I saw later on had red 7-segment LEDs, and I had a radio clock which had a blue-green 7-segment vaccum fluorescent display.
Chris
March 20, 2016 at 19:18 |
Chris
Chris
Same here -- I have a much more visceral reaction to an analog clock face than a digital one.
March 21, 2016 at 1:34 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Chris:
<< If I see a digital time it's also instant but I notice that I've immediately 'seen' the analogue equivalent in my head. It's as if the digital readout triggers the analogue mental image, and the mental image is what's used to see the time. >>
That's interesting, because I don't get that triggering of the analogue image. I wonder if that too is a function of what age you were when you were first exposed to both analogue and digital. I was in my 30s when I started to get exposure to both. I don't know what age you are, but I think you're probably younger than me and so your exposure to both came at a much earlier age so your current reaction to clocks is a bit different to mine and different to younger people as well.
<< If I see a digital time it's also instant but I notice that I've immediately 'seen' the analogue equivalent in my head. It's as if the digital readout triggers the analogue mental image, and the mental image is what's used to see the time. >>
That's interesting, because I don't get that triggering of the analogue image. I wonder if that too is a function of what age you were when you were first exposed to both analogue and digital. I was in my 30s when I started to get exposure to both. I don't know what age you are, but I think you're probably younger than me and so your exposure to both came at a much earlier age so your current reaction to clocks is a bit different to mine and different to younger people as well.
March 21, 2016 at 10:01 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Having paid attention to it more since, when I see a digital time I get a mental image more of the hour hand, which immediately gives me the hours to or from something (eg end of the day) and then I immediately subtract or add the minutes as digital minutes, without really getting an image of the minutes hand. It takes far longer to describe, and is not something I have to work out, I just look at a digital time and it's already all happened. I'm 45, I must have seen digital clocks around 1976 because a friend from school had one which intrigued me.
Chris
Chris
March 21, 2016 at 11:12 |
Chris
Chris
Chris:
Much younger then!
As a follow up question, do you have your digital clocks/watches set to 12-hour time or 24-hour time?
I have all my digital clocks set to 24-time which probably makes it more difficult for me to visualize the hour hand. But for some weird reason I find 24-hour time suits digital clocks more than 12-hour time.
I was thinking of buying a 24-hour analogue at one stage, but decided against it. Though it would have been interesting to see if I would then have learnt to visualize the clock face directly from a digital display.
http://clockwize.uk/shop/slow-jo-17-silvervintage-brown-leather?gclid=CI6V_9f30csCFZEy0wodN8ABCA
Though it's probably not a skill which is worth investing £200 to have!
Much younger then!
As a follow up question, do you have your digital clocks/watches set to 12-hour time or 24-hour time?
I have all my digital clocks set to 24-time which probably makes it more difficult for me to visualize the hour hand. But for some weird reason I find 24-hour time suits digital clocks more than 12-hour time.
I was thinking of buying a 24-hour analogue at one stage, but decided against it. Though it would have been interesting to see if I would then have learnt to visualize the clock face directly from a digital display.
http://clockwize.uk/shop/slow-jo-17-silvervintage-brown-leather?gclid=CI6V_9f30csCFZEy0wodN8ABCA
Though it's probably not a skill which is worth investing £200 to have!
March 21, 2016 at 13:56 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
An interesting 24-hour watch: http://bit.ly/1LB7rJ8
Other 24-hour watches: http://24hourwatches.info/
An interesting 24-hour watch: http://bit.ly/1LB7rJ8
Other 24-hour watches: http://24hourwatches.info/
March 21, 2016 at 15:00 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
I have them all set to 24-hour. Both 15 and 3 make me experience the same as seeing an hour hand pointing to 3.
How about this one? http://binary.onlineclock.net
Chris
How about this one? http://binary.onlineclock.net
Chris
March 21, 2016 at 15:18 |
Chris
Chris
March 21, 2016 at 16:24 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
That triggering is how I handle temperature scales. In Canada, we have to handle both C and F. (At school add Rankine and Kelvin, and a few rare ones just to keep us on our toes.) I know key points (freezing, room, fever, boiling), and then say, "Half-way between freezing and room."
Dad used to know summer temps and fever in F, and winter in C. Canada was still F, but ski waxes came from Europe.
Dad used to know summer temps and fever in F, and winter in C. Canada was still F, but ski waxes came from Europe.
March 23, 2016 at 16:50 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket:
<< Dad used to know summer temps and fever in F, and winter in C. >>
I still do!
<< Dad used to know summer temps and fever in F, and winter in C. >>
I still do!
March 23, 2016 at 16:55 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
April 21, 2016 at 2:25 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
All my digital clocks/watches are on 24-hours display.
But my motivations are not really the digital watch faces, rather the time stamp displays on other things such as emails, message and logs; that I prefer to be in 24-hours format. So my digital clocks/watches follow suit.
Oh, my favourite so far for an analogue 24-hours display is the single hand slow watch display https://www.slow-watches.com/ I mentioned earlier. Similar to Michael B's 24 hour watches.
But my motivations are not really the digital watch faces, rather the time stamp displays on other things such as emails, message and logs; that I prefer to be in 24-hours format. So my digital clocks/watches follow suit.
Oh, my favourite so far for an analogue 24-hours display is the single hand slow watch display https://www.slow-watches.com/ I mentioned earlier. Similar to Michael B's 24 hour watches.
April 21, 2016 at 9:18 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Michael B.
<< Looks at wrist. "It's almost sunset." >>
I suppose it's quicker than looking out of the window.
<< Looks at wrist. "It's almost sunset." >>
I suppose it's quicker than looking out of the window.
April 21, 2016 at 9:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
The numbers on an analog face are separated by 30 degrees (360 divided by 12). I was taught in design school many years ago that 30 degrees was the minimum angle difference between two objects in order to make the difference appear intentional. In other words, to rotate a line of words "uphill" in a design, it should be at least 30 degrees off horizontal. A smaller angle difference runs the risk of being perceived as random or simply "off".
Of course, this is just a perceptual guideline, most likely based on design gestalt principles, but I think it's a valid guideline.
Perhaps this is why when asked for the time and looking at an analog watch, the answer is often rounded to the nearest 5 minutes, which is also the nearest 30 degree mark. I know when I look at an analog face, I see the minute hand in relation to those 30 degree spots. I see 9:29 as "9:30, but a little less".
Of course, this is just a perceptual guideline, most likely based on design gestalt principles, but I think it's a valid guideline.
Perhaps this is why when asked for the time and looking at an analog watch, the answer is often rounded to the nearest 5 minutes, which is also the nearest 30 degree mark. I know when I look at an analog face, I see the minute hand in relation to those 30 degree spots. I see 9:29 as "9:30, but a little less".
April 28, 2016 at 14:32 |
Scott Moehring
Scott Moehring
Scott:
<< Perhaps this is why when asked for the time and looking at an analog watch, the answer is often rounded to the nearest 5 minutes, which is also the nearest 30 degree mark. I know when I look at an analog face, I see the minute hand in relation to those 30 degree spots. I see 9:29 as "9:30, but a little less". >>
You've got two different situations there. The first is when you are asked for the time and have to verbalize the reply. The second is when you look at the watch purely in order to see what the time is. My contention is that in the second case you simply see the time without any need to translate it into words.
<< Perhaps this is why when asked for the time and looking at an analog watch, the answer is often rounded to the nearest 5 minutes, which is also the nearest 30 degree mark. I know when I look at an analog face, I see the minute hand in relation to those 30 degree spots. I see 9:29 as "9:30, but a little less". >>
You've got two different situations there. The first is when you are asked for the time and have to verbalize the reply. The second is when you look at the watch purely in order to see what the time is. My contention is that in the second case you simply see the time without any need to translate it into words.
April 28, 2016 at 15:27 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f2/analog-vs-digital-most-efficient-time-reading-388314.html#/forumsite/20758/topics/388314?page=1