What's on your wrist? / What are you wearing? (WRUW)

Aquagraph · Jan 29, 2023

Yeah, might have looked better if they were in alignment with each other...

Yago · Jan 29, 2023

Aquagraph
Yeah, might have looked better if they were in alignment with each other...

The horizontal lines don’t help

Albert-AMG · Jan 29, 2023

Yago
Ah that’s interesting! You kinda need a sense of direction of each marker, which isn’t obvious, to see the balance. At first glance it looks a bit cluttered. Not sure this was the way to go.

The radial way in which the 'diamond markers' are aligned is consistent with the rest of the markers on the dial and bezel, numbers on the bezel included... or do you prefer the numbers on the bezel aligned vertically?

Yago · Jan 29, 2023

No since it’s rotational these should be as is. But the link with the hour markers is lost.

Albert-AMG · Jan 29, 2023

Yago
No since it’s rotational these should be as is. But the link with the hour markers is lost.

And do you prefer these square markers aligned vertically?

This ring is not rotational. If these square markers (and all other markers of the watch) are alligned in a radial way, it makes sense that also the -diamond- markers are alligned that way.

I also think they do it in this radial way, because that way the hands go through each diamond marker in the same way, being perpendicular to the hand. If they were aligned vertically, each diamond marker's hand path would look different.

Of course, when instead of diamonds they were circles, there was no problem of choosing an alignment for the markers! 😁

Mspeedster · Jan 29, 2023

Raceday Sunday at the Rolex 24 hours of Daytona. No Daytona for me, so wearing my Aquaracer wannabe instead. 😜

Jim Dollares · Jan 29, 2023

Albert-AMG
And do you prefer these square markers aligned vertically?

This ring is not rotational. If these square markers (and all other markers of the watch) are alligned in a radial way, it makes sense that also the -diamond- markers are alligned that way.

I also think they do it in this radial way, because that way the hands go through each diamond marker in the same way, being perpendicular to the hand. If they were aligned vertically, each diamond marker's hand path would look different.

Of course, when instead of diamonds they were circles, there was no problem of choosing an alignment for the markers! 😁

Thank you Albert, this makes a lot of sense now 👍 I guess I needed another couple hundred hours of Aquaracer staring to see the logic in the design.

Yago · Jan 29, 2023

Albert-AMG
And do you prefer these square markers aligned vertically?

No but like the bezel question you already know the answer to this question. I don’t think the numbers on the bezel or minute ring squares should be horizontal or vertical. They’re fine as is. My point is that the radial alignment of the hour markers is visually lost because a. the markers are diamonds and therefore have no direction, and b. they are placed on a dial with horizontal lines, further accentuating the visual randomness of their placement. These diamonds are seriously overdesigned imo and the whole radial idea behind them is completely lost on me. I suppose the reasoning behind this detail is that Bove wanted to differentiate a little more from the Seamaster.

Albert-AMG · Jan 29, 2023

Yago
a. the markers are diamonds and therefore have no direction, and b. they are placed on a dial with horizontal lines, further accentuating the visual randomness of their placement.

I think a. these octagonal 'diamonds' have direction (each side of the octagon has direction). Only the circles of the previous AR have no direction, and for this reason have no alignment problems 😁

and b. they are not randomly placed but aligned in a radial way, with the top side of each octagon perpendicular to the hands (or parallel to the minute ring squares)

You said “the little ‘diamonds’ aren’t alligned. They’re pointing all over the place. Good thing you hardly notice their shape in the metal cos my ocd would seriously kick in”… so I just tried to avoid any ocd issues to you (and to Jim 😉) by finding the logic of the octagonal markers alignment 😁

Yago · Jan 30, 2023

If you could tell me in which direction this points I'd be very grateful. I've studied plenty of math in my years but I can't figure this one out.

I realize you could say each side points in a direction, but that only means it points in every direction, as per my point. You really need to know the link with the minute ring and bezel for this to make sense. It's not obvious as in the case of baton markers for instance. Jim has spent months drooling over the AR and never realized. He's from the north, but still, he should have spotted it.

Albert-AMG
and b. they are not randomly placed but aligned in a radial way

again, I'm not saying they are, but they appear that way.

Jim Dollares · Jan 30, 2023

Yago
He's from the north, but still, he should have spotted it.

Aquagraph · Jan 30, 2023

I think to appease the eye, the markers should be flat, parallel with the slats. I think the bezel cause a conflict with the markers, even though one is an octagon and one a dodecagon...

But maybe, that would look weird too?

Aquagraph · Jan 30, 2023

Albert-AMG
And do you prefer these square markers aligned vertically?

This ring is not rotational. If these square markers (and all other markers of the watch) are alligned in a radial way, it makes sense that also the -diamond- markers are alligned that way.

I also think they do it in this radial way, because that way the hands go through each diamond marker in the same way, being perpendicular to the hand. If they were aligned vertically, each diamond marker's hand path would look different.

Of course, when instead of diamonds they were circles, there was no problem of choosing an alignment for the markers! 😁

Actually, yes Albert changed my mind already.

dtf · Jan 30, 2023

I’ve always thought having a flat of the markers aligned with the edge of the dial was right, because the WAY, 500m, etc had their markers aligned radially.

Horizontal alignment is more of a Monaco thing:

abrod520 · Jan 30, 2023

I know I'm late to the argument but I'd like to point out that in person on the wrist, the markers look like regular circular markers and only reveal themselves to be octagonal upon closer inspection. As I've said before, it makes it more of a fun detail rather than a weird design choice.

Jemagloh · Jan 30, 2023

Aquagraph · Jan 30, 2023

abrod520
I know I'm late to the argument but I'd like to point out that in person on the wrist, the markers look like regular circular markers and only reveal themselves to be octagonal upon closer inspection. As I've said before, it makes it more of a fun detail rather than a weird design choice.

That's cos your eyes are rubbish. I can see them, and I'm 53 years old!

Jim Dollares · Jan 30, 2023

Aquagraph
That's cos your eyes are rubbish. I can see them, and I'm 53 years old!

Yeah Adam must be fυcking blind. I have super thick nerd glasses cause my eyes are so bad but no way those markers look round when I look at my wrist 👎

dtf · Jan 30, 2023

abrod520
I know I'm late to the argument but I'd like to point out that in person on the wrist, the markers look like regular circular markers and only reveal themselves to be octagonal upon closer inspection. As I've said before, it makes it more of a fun detail rather than a weird design choice.

I was surprised how circular they looked, but I can’t get away from the polygonization of the aquaracer. I also don’t get the desire to move to circular markers, it brings it closer to just being just-another-sub-clone. Is the new AR the sub clone for the minecraft generation?

Aquagraph · Jan 30, 2023

They could go back to round markers and call it a tribute to the original Aquaracer...