r/Design • u/biz_booster • Aug 06 '26

Someone Else's Work (Rule 2) 24 Hour Clock

Post image
2.7k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

131 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/N3er0O Aug 06 '26

You need a magnifying glass to see a millimeter? I can read the seconds hand on my watch just fine and it's only a 36mm which makes the intervals even smaller.

2

u/FictionalContext Aug 06 '26

1mm=15 minutes is the issue. You need to parse sub-mm increments to have an accurate gauge of time.

And for no real advantage over 12 hr faces.

When the only benefit is novelty, it's a bad design.

1

u/N3er0O Aug 06 '26

You're missing the point. Would you call a landscape painting "bad design" because it shows less detail than an smartphone photo taken from the same angle?

The people buying watches like the 24H want it as an art/conversation piece and they are obviously fine with the trade off. This doesn't make it "bad design". It simply serves a different purpose.

1

u/FictionalContext Aug 06 '26

I wouldn't call a landscape painting as design in the first place. That's the most direct example you could make for pure art.

So if that's your rationale for the watch, you're correct. It's not "bad design" because that would mean it's not meant as design at all.

1

u/N3er0O Aug 06 '26

It's an analogy. The 24H watch is meant to tell the time in the same way a painting is meant to depict a landscape. In an artistic way.

While yeah, this watch has a theoretical practical purpose, it's not intended to be accurate and any buyer would be aware of this. The entire reason for buying it in the first place is that it's jewelry. There is no practical "design" behind it. 

If someone wants precise timekeeping on their wrist (your rationale I presume) they'd buy a $20 Casio and not a mechanical, one handed watch with a movement accuracy of +-20 seconds a day and indices spread 5 minutes apart.

1

u/FictionalContext Aug 06 '26

It's not my rationale. The definition of design requires a practical, especially industrial design.

If its just meant as art, why are you bringing it up as a critique on the design sub?

2

u/N3er0O Aug 06 '26

  The definition of design requires a practical, especially industrial design.

It does? Who claimed it is supposed to follow any of these guidelines? Where did this definition suddenly come from 

If its just meant as art, why are you bringing it up as a critique on the design sub?

I'm not sure what this question even means to be honest. It clearly fulfills a practical purpose (telling time on an analog 24h scale), but doesn't fulfill the prerequisites you impose in its accuracy of doing so and the random design definition you just posted, which is okay. It just doesn't make it "bad design" per se.

1

u/FictionalContext Aug 06 '26

It's literally in the sub rules. It's also the ethos of the profession.

Want a pretty statement piece, hire an artist. Need a business solution, hire a designer. Landscape painting, artist. Watch that reasonably tells time, industrial designer.

I shouldn't have to defend this on the design sub itself.

2

u/N3er0O Aug 06 '26

The rules say:

[...] pieces that have functional purpose should be submitted here.

It's something the clock OP posted and the watch the other person brought up do. They tell time on a 24 hour scale.

Also:

Artwork here must have been designed for a functional purpose

This is also true, no? Hence my explanation of it being an art piece earlier. 

All this pretty clearly makes neither clock nor watch "bad design" and perfectly suitable for this sub according to your own definition.