Hello all. I’ve always been a digital clock user, but I am trying to get myself used to reading an analog watch.
For the most part it’s fine, taking me several extra seconds over digital so far.
But one thing I am struggling with is discerning the exact minute. Because the minute hand slowly moves over time as opposed to ticking, I have trouble telling whether or not it’s say…9:22 or 9:23 for example.
Because when the time is say…9:22 and 5 seconds, the hand will clearly be on the 9:22 mark. But when it’s 9:22 and 45 seconds, it looks like it’s actually 9:23 when it isn’t yet.
Is this just always a limitation that I’m stuck with using analog? How precise are you all with analog clocks? Is there a way I can more quickly determine the exact minute?
Thanks!
I used to read analog clocks to the nearest five minutes. It’s just a quick glance and you (used to) rarely need to be that exact.
However my kids never got used to analog clocks despite an annoying number scattered throughout our house. It takes them too long to process what I mean by “quarter of”. They’re in college this year so it’s time to surrender in that battle. Now I’m the one who spends too much time reading analog clocks, trying to read them to nearest minute.
With digital clocks everywhere, gps exact trip times, scheduled meetings, society has gotten much more exact with time anyway. Being within five minutes is no longer good enough
Get a good clock - the ten minute intervals will be clearly marked as well as five with lil’ submarkers. You can train your pattern recognition that way
Source: am old
You’ll just get used to it over time. Think of it as spatial rather than numeric.
It’s actually easier on the brain in my opinion.
Yep. If it’s 9:22:45, then rounding to 9:23 is more accurate than 9:22 anyway.
I break it into quarters first 12-3, 3-6, 6-9, 9-12. I break it into thirds next, this gets the hour.
Then for minutes i do the same and just do quick caculations in my head,
1/3 of a quarter before 6 is 25 minutes, 1/3 of a quarter after 9 is 50 minutes.
The only thing im really remembering is that values at the quarters,
(12/0 hours - 0 min), 3 hr - 15 min, (6 hr - 30 min), 9 hr - 45 minutes.
After a while it becomes second nature. I learned this when i was a kid because digital clocks werent as common then.
The concept of numbers doesn’t come up. The way the hands are conveys the fraction of the hour or half day that has passed. There’s never a need to know the exact number, time is continuous and not discrete. The minute hand will move fractional minutes, too.
I grew up with analog clocks and can read them at a glance.
For the most part, I don’t really care precisely about minute. E.g. the analog clock in my kitchen is only used to tell me that it’s “roughly 2 minutes past 5 soon” and it’s enough for me to put the potatoes on.
If I need to know precisely whether it’s 16:03 vs 16:04, I use a digital clock. Though mostly because my analog clocks are not precisely synced at all times.
Back when analog was the norm, nobody cared about a minute here or there unless they had some specific profession. Like, the bus came “15:15 ish maybe 5 minutes early maybe 10 minutes late”. Everyone’s clock were off by at least 2 minutes anyway.
Today in the digital age, the bus schedule says “15:17”
Today in the digital age, the bus schedule says “15:17”
And the bus might show up about twenty past three, if you’re lucky
Today in the digital age, the bus schedule says “15:17”
Yeah essentially lol. That’s one of the reasons I had never been super into analog clocks beforehand.
GenX here. I wanted to reassure you that it didn’t come naturally to me and i grew up when this was still taught in school. The real answer is practice. Read a clock several times a day for a few weeks. Take a moment to think about the mintue hand. Is it about 2/5 of the way to the next digit? 3/5? After a while, you won’t have to think. You will just recognize.
If I’m bored, sure. Otherwise it’s to the nearest 5 minutes
I usually round to 5 minutes. If I for whatever reason need the exact minute it will take a couple of second to see, depending on the design of the clock.
This is the way
I think of analog time as kinda a pie chart telling me how much of the minute and hour that’s elapsed. So I don’t see 13:45, I see 75% past one o’clock.
Does that make sense?
This is why I hate when people ask me what time it is. I can glance at my watch and know what time it is but not in a format that makes sense to other people. In order to tell someone what time it is I have convert to a “normal” format and that makes it look like I cannot quickly read my own watch.
deleted by creator
I … look at them. There is no actual thinking that occurs. If it is 9:22 then it is 9:22. If it is 9:23 then it is 9:23. I understand your question, but if the trailing side of the minute hand is not yet even with or past the plane of the upcoming minute, then it remains the previous minute.
Maybe my vision just isn’t good enough, but the individual ticks for the minute hand are so small that I have difficulty without holding the watch closer to my face and studying it for a moment if it’s close to the next minute but not there yet. I don’t have old eyes either lol. It’s just small. Maybe a wall clock would be easier to see quickly.
the hands tell the time, not the ticks. if you know what way is up, then the angle is all you need.
Maybe to help the OP I’ll add a bit to your answer. The entire face of an analog clock is divided into fractional sections. Sounds like you’re really good at parsing those fractions, likely due to lots of practice.
So, big hand after the nine and before the ten? Between :45 and :50. First half of that? Between :46 and :47. More toward the beginning of the split? :46
Maybe OP hasn’t had as much practice so has to think about what 9 is in minutes? Nothing but practice would help get over that, I guess.
If I need that level of precision, I’ll use a digital clock or set an alarm.
I can usually tell the time, at a glance, within 1-2 minutes which is precise enough for 99.999% of cases. Most IRL scheduling has a lower bound of 5-minute increments, so looking at an analog clock for the exact minute isn’t really necessary. e.g. 7:21 and 7:23 are effectively the same for all but the rarest of my purposes.
I guess I’m at that age where stuff like this means I’m old 😂
I’ll answer your question though: just buy a watch that the minutes are clearly marked with ticks and the minute hand moves by the minute and isn’t in constant motion.
Here’s some friendly advice though. Before digital, there really wasn’t a way to be so accurate down to the minute. Remember there wasn’t even really a way to get the right time. You just got it from somewhere else and hoped that time was accurate. Most people set their watches to the places that we’re important to them, ie work. So that they they were on time to whatever it was that they needed to get to.
With that said, anyone that needed pinpoint accuracy had other means of getting the time or they used very expensive chronometers that kept time extremely well. In other words normal people just did stuff a couple minutes early in case their watches were slow.
ALL OF THAT to say if you want accuracy down to the minute, just use digital.
Imo for most applications that I’d be using an analog clock for a time difference of even up to 5-10 minutes is irrelevant. If I really needed up to the minute accuracy I’m using a digital clock with the seconds counting down
I don’t generally read them to the minute very often. For the most part, 5 min increments are close enough for what I need, most of the time. If I do need a more precise time, I’m usually already closely watching the clock and it’s just addition (was 1341 when I started this, now it’s 1345.).
If I need to get the precise time, cold, than it’s as simple as: closest 5 min tick, then add or subtract minute ticks till you get to the minute hand
Eventually you get to the point where it’s not something you consciously think about. You just look at the clock and then pattern recognition takes over and you just know what time it is.
