I had a seemingly stupid idea in the last few days.
I only have the suspicion that my pc does not create it according to my ideas.
The level with the LEDs now consists of 47,233 transparent objects.
It seems like I have to try another way.
2 Likes
That does seem a little bit too much for a wrist watch 
1 Like
This is already too much for the pc 
Way 2 probably works better.
After that is a PNG with transparency.
1 Like
I’ve toiled with a similar idea to an infinite mirror. Have you considered more of an active depth animation like this fading circle?
Or perhaps a gyro sensitive depth applied to your LEDs?
4 Likes
I found accelerometerRaw works best though the x axis has a tendency to self center on some watches. I did a Gyro version as well if you want to see that let me know.
3 Likes
your ideas are great.
First and foremost I try to get a realistic look.
I still don’t know how to proceed then.
2 Likes
It is also in my head to do something with dots, but you nailed it with this one, very beautiful, love it!!
2 Likes
first test incl. dim mode
5 Likes
looks great. It’s just unfortunate that it’s really hard to convey this detail at such a small resolution. I am currently working on a “3D” pixeled/dot matrix type thingy too, but at the end of the day, I dont think its gonna be able to translate to the final tiny screen output of a smart watch. I wish you luck in your endeavor.
2 Likes
thank you
this time I worked with four times the resolution.
1280 x 1280
The test shows a great result.
On my 36mm watch the graphics are pin sharp.
The loading times do not change noticeably.
I can only recommend.
1 Like
thats my working resolution too 1280x1280 72dpi. I guess it just depends, sometimes when it’s compressed down to “Facer” size, it looks just fine, other times…not so much.
1 Like
hmm
because of my work in the field of advertising technology, i always have 150 or 300 dpi.
72 dpi is more for websites.
yes, the files have more kb, but that makes little difference with such small images.
I looked at it again in the big preview.
Basically, when the hands are at a certain angle, you’ll see a little messy lines when it’s at a certain angle.
But that’s just unavoidable.
But it’s much too small on the watch to see it.
1 Like
I have been working at stupid Resolutions 2400 2560. Thinking I was being clever. So thanks guys 1280 is a jolly nice number. As you say as it gets Tiny no Issue. I just wonder about DPI. I leave mine set yo 72. Is DPI just not about the size the Poster gets printed at. I have a few settings for Anti Aliasing. I jave learnt that if I am making a cutting mask I leave it Off but a bit of Fuziness on the edges of Bits is Quite nice.
Sorry to join in when we go off Topic but Hey.
yeah I really dont know about the DPI but I figure that the Facer Creator app and Facer is “web-based” so 72 works for me.
1 Like
DPI - dots per inch
yes, more or less that is relevant for prints.
but the graphics programs then apparently process it differently.
but we are talking about grains of sand in the desert …
1 Like
Some times this Community is like being down the Pub. Sadly I did not learn that much Down the Pub but I do here . Thanks always :::)))
2 Likes
Click me —> 
2 Likes
I couldn’t have explained it any better. 
1 Like
