We've all seen those new fan-dangled electronic photo frames at the moment (well I asume so anyway) so why not take the next step and put them on our wrist.
It would be the same technology as the photo frames (put your camera's memory card into the frame and voila, your photos are shown in a slide show) but obviously smaller to fit on your wrist. Now, I have seen something similar but it only holds 26 photos and you use a USB chord to upload your photos. Using a memory card would make it a much quicker process for puting photos on and plus the amount of photos that can be shown is really only dependant on the size of your memory card.
The world (well our japanese friends anyway) is becoming more fascinated with wearable tech so this could be a big hit with those hip youths that keep hanging around at the end of my street of an evening-- Heavy_Phat, Nov 22 2006 Photo Watch http://www.geeks.co...nvtid=ED03W&cat=CONSo you dont have to go search. [Chefboyrbored, Nov 22 2006] oh. http://www.meritline.com/usb-watch.htmlOK. [Chefboyrbored, Nov 22 2006] Human clock http://www.humanclock.comOnly updated once a minute though... [jtp, Nov 22 2006] The watch must have an internal memory if it can hold 26 photos. Adding the memory card option would take more space and make the already bulky photo watch more obtrusive. Why would you need more than 26 photos on a watch anyway?-- Chefboyrbored, Nov 22 2006 Because you might have more than 26 memories-- Heavy_Phat, Nov 22 2006 Ok, I can dig that. Do you need to see them all, all the time?-- Chefboyrbored, Nov 22 2006 It would be better than just seeing the same 26 over and over again. Think of the possibilities...1000 photos constantly being displayed on your wrist. Its the future my friend-- Heavy_Phat, Nov 22 2006 Ok, a thousand photo's sounds better. But having a memory card to hold 200 would be just as boring. I give you a + unless somebody can link a watch with a memory card.-- Chefboyrbored, Nov 22 2006 144 photos is the ideal number. Why? Because 144 photos displayed over 12 hours would allow you to tell the time to within 5 minutes.-- hippo, Nov 22 2006 //144 photos displayed over 12 hours would allow you to tell the time to within 5 minutes.//Especially if they were all photographs of a clock.-- angel, Nov 22 2006 //Especially if they were all photographs of a clock.//
You could use the pictures from the site in the link, but it only updates once a minute.-- jtp, Nov 22 2006 angel, this is indeed true halbakery style: Using a really advanced photo watch with umpteen GB of mini SD card, to display a photograph of an analogue watch every second. The really, really advanced version can display photos from a digital casio watch worth about $1, and even allows you to navigate photographic menus to set up the alarm.-- Ling, Nov 22 2006 Ideally the changing image would show a different timepiece every second - "ooh look, it's a Rolex ... no, it's a sundial ... now it's one of those candles with markings down the side ... now it's a cheap Casio ..." - but all showing the correct time.-- hippo, Nov 22 2006 With a mode switch that has more functions than can be remembered, and one of them forces the watch into anti-theft mode: it shows a broken Timex. However, by the time you have actually managed to change the mode by pressing the mode switch a sufficient number of times, scrolled down the menu, sub menu 1 and sub menu 2, the would be thief has taken pity and given you his A. Lange and Sohne.-- Ling, Nov 22 2006 So can it tell time?-- BJS, Nov 22 2006 Who needs to know the time when you have memories....But i suppose you could add a feature that tells the time, a "time telling feature" if you will. Shouldn't be to difficult to do-- Heavy_Phat, Nov 22 2006 Scrapbookers and grandmothers would eat this up!!!-- Alysonwonderland, Nov 28 2006 Casio have already gone one step beyond this - the watch has a digital camera in the top edge of the watch. I would post a link, but the watch seems to have disappeared from the Casio website.-- neutrinos_shadow, Nov 28 2006 random, halfbakery