It must be about processing power and battery life. Hands are moving graphic elements, which would require an alpha mask over a photo. The digital face is just text. There's also a legibility concern. A complex photo with light and dark areas would be tricky to read with all white or all black hands moving around it, which would mean the hands need a drop shadow, and more processing power to render it.
Just checking, did you go to the Watch App on your phone, and under Photos, choose the correct "Synced Album" for your watch?
View attachment 584680
Apple don't need to make a watch face app store, just let us put a background image underneath the "simple" watchface. A complication for each of the corners and sorted. This avoids any copyright and trademark problems.I have to agree with this and I don't understand why Apple hasn't released watch faces through the store. Do they realize how much money they could make if they hold the monopoly on watch faces charging 99 cents for each?
Also, if you can move apps around in the Apple Watch app, they could let us move things around with a custom watch face design. Saves all lawsuits since we design it. Must be a limitation?
I do believe this is coming.
What size do you make the photo? When I do it...the picture is way off center in the watch face. I've tried all different sizes.
Thanks.
The only reason I can think of is that Apple don't want people loading photos of existing watch faces, sans hands, on their Apple Watch.I appreciate your elaborating on the technical issues. However, even with the current implementation of custom photos, the user has to be careful with creating a photo that doesn't obscure the text and numbers, and at least in my own efforts has required some trial an error to get a visually appealing wallpaper photo. So Apple hasn't really gone out of their way to make this foolproof for the consumer, and such would apply to the clock face as well. Regardless, I simply don't believe that this wasn't one of the first things Apple did when they started encoding watch faces over 4 years ago now. Are they withholding it merely for processing power and battery life? I can certainly accept that for the initial release as they gauged how customers were actually going to be using it. But I don't get it now. And Tapping Mickey has essentially already been doing this since the beginning. Plus, they are turning on options like 70 second backlight, and giving users time lapse and random photos -- how much more processor intensive is that going to be loading a new photo every time? Again, it's clear Apple has not released a perfect, fool-proof, custom photo watch face. Users can upload a photo that doesn't look good with the text overlay. But how many customers are going to complain that their photos don't look good this way, if they can make a few adjustments and get something that does, versus not having the ability at all? In the end it has to be more than just technical limitations.
I think Apple will open up an App Store category for watch faces eventually and not approve any high end imitation faces as well as remove any others thats vendors identify. I also think that Rolex, Tag, Pulsar, Seiko etc will submit their own faces soon after as they'll want that ad space.The only reason I can think of is that Apple don't want people loading photos of existing watch faces, sans hands, on their Apple Watch.
I bet if Apple ever do let you use a photo background with an analog watch face, people will be editing Rolex watch face pictures onto their AW immediately.
And I think Apple don't want that. They want to keep their brand to themselves and any collaborations like the Hermes AW.
Like the shirt says, "Real Men Go For Two." I've got to build up a stash of Husker backgrounds again.My Husker themed ones. I'm surprised how well old photos look on the watch compared to new photos.
Agree with this and black looks great. I have one album just for black backgrounds and they look great on the watch. Easy to find as well. Google black background and pick images. I have about 30 that look great.
Good point. Looks really good at night that is for sure.While this makes a certain amount of sense, Anyone using those time-lapse watch faces, better only use them at night then! ;-)