Timelapse and Photo Faces (ETA: Looks Like They're Gone)

[Camusrieux]

Isn't Timelapse the same as Motion?

No, I don't think so. Motion shows (IIRC) various species of flowers, jellyfish, and butterflies. Timelapse shows (or showed) a series of photographs taken in two different places—one next to Westminster Bridge and the Houses of Parliament in London, the other next to a mountain lake—at different times during the course of a (presumably single) day.

I think Timelapse looks gorgeous, which is the main reason I'm pretty disappointed about apparently not having access to it soon.

----------

D'oh.

From Joanna Stern's (I think fairly nice, overall-positive-but-with-some-critical-points) AWatch review in the WSJ:

(L)ast week, as I was running late for dinner with my wife and some friends, I still found time to change into my evening watch face: an animated butterfly that changes colors when you pull up the screen. I love that you can customize the colors and details of the watch faces, though I do wish I could personalize it more with photos or backgrounds.

G'bye, Photo Face.

 

[Rogifan]

No, I don't think so. Motion shows (IIRC) various species of flowers, jellyfish, and butterflies. Timelapse shows (or showed) a series of photographs taken in two different places—one next to Westminster Bridge and the Houses of Parliament in London, the other next to a mountain lake—at different times during the course of a (presumably single) day.

I think Timelapse looks gorgeous, which is the main reason I'm pretty disappointed about apparently not having access to it soon.

----------

D'oh.

From Joanna Stern's (I think fairly nice, overall-positive-but-with-some-critical-points) AWatch review in the WSJ:



G'bye, Photo Face.

Not sure why they removed photo faces but I must say I was never really fond of it because it really showed off the bezels. I like things with a black background that hide the bezel as much as possible.

 

[parkds]

Not sure why they removed photo faces but I must say I was never really fond of it because it really showed off the bezels. I like things with a black background that hide the bezel as much as possible.

I think this is exactly the reason why the timelapse and photo faces were nixed. Since they filled the entire watch face with an image, it really ended up highlighting the bezel instead of blending in. Every watch face on the shipping watch has black around the edges.

 

[Camusrieux]

I think this is exactly the reason why the timelapse and photo faces were nixed. Since they filled the entire watch face with an image, it really ended up highlighting the bezel instead of blending in. Every watch face on the shipping watch has black around the edges.

Good point, parkds and Rogifan. Guess I just don't mind seeing those bezels. Curse you, Jony!

 

[johnnyjibbs]

I think this is exactly the reason why the timelapse and photo faces were nixed. Since they filled the entire watch face with an image, it really ended up highlighting the bezel instead of blending in. Every watch face on the shipping watch has black around the edges.

I think this, and the fact it could nuke the battery, might have something to do with it. Or that they were too "smart watchy " and not real watch enough.

Still, there's precious little or no mention of this anywhere in any of the articles or reviews, which is odd considering it was so prominently featured in older marketing material and the September launch. Even the Apple Watch roundup page on Macrumors shows images of it (including shots of when it was previously on Apple's Timekeeping page), even though there is no mention of it.

Personally, I think it's hard to get the "millions of combinations" without the ability to customise the watch face with your own photo. And I must admit the UI is (although probably by design) a bit black without it.

Still, let's hope these or more watch faces will come through in a future software update, as the number of faces is quite limited at the moment.

 

[Mascots]

Personally, I think it's hard to get the "millions of combinations" without the ability to customise the watch face with your own photo. And I must admit the UI is (although probably by design) a bit black without it.

Haha I so agree. It's a surprise that the photos watch face was removed, but I agree it was probably because of the way it makes the bezels stand out.

I'm sure we'll get something like it soon, it seems like an obvious feature, so I'm sure a lot of people will be baffled.

 

[justinthesommer]

New Watchfaces?

Talked with a specialist online and this is what he said!

 

[heeloliver]

Probably because it shows the bezel. Across the entire Watch UI, they use multiple tricks to hide the bezel. I guess these just didn't make the cut.

 

[MrLoL]

Talked with a specialist online and this is what he said!

LOL! Doubt it..

 

[Camusrieux]

Talked with a specialist online and this is what he said!

Yes, well, that can be technically correct without being particularly exciting. The Timekeeping page currently shows nine faces; the watch sent out to reviewers (and available for trying out in Apple Stores) has ten. 10 > 9, so that is indeed "more." Eh.

The face that's on the current Watch but not listed on the Timekeeping page is "X-Large"—which I'm sure will be useful to some folks, but it sure ain't Timelapse or Photo.

 

[M-5]

I thought edition models get a couple of exclusive faces in the way of having the butterfly clock face be a rose gold color instead of the usual blue for instance. Maybe I'm mistaken.

 

[Camusrieux]

Hey, look--John Gruber of daringfireball.net has linked to this thread!

Too bad it's such a downer of a thread.

Apple will almost certainly introduce more built-in faces eventually, including some that allow for more personalization. In September, they showed two that have since been removed: Timelapse (they showed two options: one with Big Ben and Parliament at night in London; the other showed a scenic lake and mountain) and Photo (which, in Apple’s press materials, showed a snapshot of friends at a beach).[Footnote 1] And they might work with hand-selected partners like Disney to create additional faces like the Mickey one. But I don’t think they’re ever going to open the gates to App Store-style “anyone can make a watch face” watch faces. I think Apple sees watch faces as part of the system, like the lock and home screens for iOS. We’re eight years into iOS and there still isn’t any support for third-party lock or home screens. I expect the same thing for watch faces.

Footnote 1: It seems pretty obvious why Apple nixed these two faces: they’re the ones that use the most energy on an OLED display. Just about every compromise I’ve noticed in Apple Watch OS 1.0 is in the service of extending battery life at all costs.

 

[John6Plus]

I didn't actually tap it, but when playing with the watch in the Apple Store and changing the watch face, all the way down on the end to the right of the watch faces was an empty rectangle, except for a "+" in the middle. So the universal symbol for "add something" is right there in the watch face picker.

 

[Camusrieux]

Gruber is correct that most of the early renderings of the Photo face used one particular picture of backlit people (though how does he know they're "friends"?) on a beach as a background. There is actually at least one other example of Photo in the early materials, though: in the lengthy "Introducing Apple Watch" film that played during the event in September, the second-to-last Watch shown in the film, at 10:26 of the video, shows a Photo face with a picture of a brunette model as the background image.

Again, grrrr that Photo does not appear to be on the shipping Watch.

----------

I didn't actually tap it, but when playing with the watch in the Apple Store and changing the watch face, all the way down on the end to the right of the watch faces was an empty rectangle, except for a "+" in the middle. So the universal symbol for "add something" is right there in the watch face picker.

Yes, I saw that as well. More faces are certainly coming. But which, and when (and how)? No one seems to know.

 

[glxyjones]

I've seen material design. It's honestly horrifically bad. It's astoundingly hilarious to me that people said/say iOS7 design is kiddie like. Look at material design HAHAHA it is essentially for children. It looks cartoony and unprofessional. It's no wonder though...Google has a slide in their HQ..

There are other good UI designers, but they're stuck doing terrible things being given terrible direction, at terrible companies.

There are incredible independent UI designers out there that might have the innovation/vision to create a watch face that surpasses even Apple's.

"Leaving it to Apple" is something that could have been said when the original iPhone came out without an app store. Yes, Apple makes incredible apps and there are an incredible amount of really crappy apps in there by developers who don't know anything, but there are a few which exceed Apple's own apps. Perhaps there's a developer/designer out there who has an idea for a watch face that will blow Apple's out of the water. The bottom line is that introducing a Watch Face API that would allow users to choose from a number of 3rd party watch faces is not a bad thing. If YOU want to exclusively use Apple's watch faces on your Apple Watch than you can ignore the 3rd party ones. However, there's no reason to hinder the options given to other Apple Watch owners.