Image Fulgurator projects images into other people's photos
By Nilay Patel 
posted Jun 26th 2008 8:42AM
posted Jun 26th 2008 8:42AM
[Via Core 77]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
Hahaha!
Awesome
terrorist!
Yeah, so awesome! I would LOVE IT if I had a regular camera and I took a picture of my favorite piece of art from the Louvre and traveled back home to the US and found my picture was RUINED by some moron with this device. That would be TOTALLY worth the $2K+ trip there to go to the museum!
It's a good way to get shot, if that's what you're going for.
"Hundreds of people died last year by trying this at the US - Mexico border"
really?
You don't go to the Louvre to take a picture, moron.
Actually Dan,
You can take pictures in the Louvre of any art piece you like.
In fact, last year when I was there, so many cameras were flashing at the Mona Lisa you would have thought a Hollywood Celeb was posing beside it.
My only question about all of this:
If the Louvre is full of priceless art, won't the constant barrage of flashes damage them?
It really boggled me that crap art museums here in the states won't even let you take a single picture with a flash, but the Parisians permit it limitlessly.
@ytril
the lovre doesn't allow flash photography from what I remember from my visit recently. Also taking a picture of the Mona Lisa with a flash would ruin the picture. The Mona Lisa is behind glass (I assume it is actually an acrylic or Plexiglas) the flash would ruin the picture.
jodosh:
Not a single Louvre employees (or the dozens of security guards hanging about) stopped the flash photography. I, in fact, took multiple pictures of the Mona Lisa with my camera flash as well. Not to mention the hundreds of others I took overall in the museum.
You are correct though, the Mona Lisa is behind glass or some protective polycarbonate.
Bob, don't worry about your Louvre photos. This device is set off by the flash of another camera. You can't take flash photography in most museums including the Louvre.
The video was lame though. 2/3 the video was a lame setup and only the last 1/3 of the video was good.
When I saw the ML they were really bitchy about anyone taking any pictures *at all.*
I had to take a picture of it when I was in the hall, about 15m away. They didn't have any problems with me taking some pictures of the other art though. (I didn't use a flash at any time though.)
"Obey!"
"Buy Apple iPod!"
"Your political leaders know best!"
I miss subliminal messages...
I miss reading intelligent comments.
iEye... You're a bad apple...
wow this comment's truly a cry for help
I so want one of these!!! Just imagine the fun you can have with one of those TV "Ghost Hunther" type of shows!
I suspect Mr Bismarck might ruin a holiday photo or two, but if the tourists ever realize what hit them, the uniqueness of their photos will increase dramatically. Übercool.
This might be the answer to copyrighted / private areas where photography isn't allowed...
Nope. It relies on the flash. Turn the flash off and set a long exposure (with a tripod of course) and you still can get an image (a better one in fact).
Yeah, but who the hell can set up a tripod w/ camera without getting caught?
"All your photo are belong to us!"
Seriously thought, I never considered th possibility of watermarking (or subliminal messaging/advertising depending on its application :P)whole displays in real-time. The only thing is if it detects camera flashes where would this be used? Usually outdoors people don't need a flash, while if you were going to display something indoors usually it's well-lit enough so it can be appreciated on display, thus not needing a flash either.
While I'm a little confused on its application it's an amazing device and for it to be a DIY makes it all the more sweeter.
application is perfect for palces like art galleries where they say no flash photos and people do it anyways.
solution: ruin their photos if they take them.
DJ.. that and performances is precisely what I was thinking as well. A big "STOP THAT" might be nice.
Or make a great GPS game out of it ;)
@DJ
Exactly, I can imagine a museum where they forbid flash photography and people ignore it. When they get home and see the pictures, it'll say on each of them:
"We told you not to use flash photography. But noooo!"
Honey,
why does it look like you've got a pair of testicles on your chin in our wedding photos?
No, dear, those are the honeymoon photos!
As an art photographer who uses film, I denounce this act of douchebaggery!
My Goodness! Those are, after all, my bachorlette pictures!
Ingenious!
"No Flashes when taking a picture of Mona Lisa!"
Written on Mona Lisa painting itself xD
Well actually they do have a warning about "don't use flash" if I remember correctly in the museum (Musée du Louvre) but all people actually use it, making picture look horrible in most cases. I recommend using a tripod :) or getting a picture guide with great photos.
Actually, the museums that do allow photography usually do not allow "professional" equipment or tripods. They don't want you making your own print of the art, especially when it is for sale in the gift shop.
At least ruin their pictures with something worthwhile. At then end when I saw what the text was, just made the whole thing the lamest thing ever.
dumbest thing ever
seriously can't these technology artists do something useful?
GRL's stuff is so much cooler anyway.
"Anyone using a digital camera will notice the trick immediately, of course, but marks with film equipment won't ever know what hit 'em."
Well, I'll keep that in mind next time I'm on vacation in 1994.
Wow, you had a digital camera in 1995? I knew someone in 1999 that had one, and that was before spending $300 on a camera was no big deal.
People still shoot on film, there are certain advantages if you are a professional. Also, what format do you think movies are shot on? FILM
Movies aren't recognized as movies if they are not *filmed*. There was an issue with students making a great 30-minute movie for a contest but wasn't accepted because it was recorded with a digital video camera on DVD instead of film.
There are advantages in both formats - digital and analog - but older people stick to things they've used for years, while youngsters prefer new technologies. You can expect a shift of interest to digitals in next 50 years :)
Now at Nobama rallies, I can project pictures of the diverse people behind him that his handlers moved out of camera because they didn't fit "the message" (whatever that is). Cool!
Need to make it look like another camera (instead of a gun) so it looks like I'm just taking a picture like everyone else...
Nice attempt there, go back to LGF or RedState if you want to talk about politics. This here is a blog about gadgets and technology.
hey, I have an idea, take your mindless drivel somewhere else you fucking moron....
Imagine what the paparazzi would think of this? Hey all you celebs out there.... just hire a guy (or a girl) to have one of these and all those pics they take will be... .toast!
Fuck that. Some people still use film and I imagine they would be pretty heartbroken if they got home from their once-in-a-lifetime trip to Europe and had their pictures developed just to find "LOL, I HA>
i would have agreed with this, except for that it only turns on when it detects FLASH photography. Flash photography, more specifically, heat, catalyzes chemical reactions and deteriorates paintings.
also, i hate douchebags who use flash everywhere.
People need to learn how to take their damn cameras off full auto.
I believe the message said "Every day hundreds of people die attempting to cross borders around the world." Or something close to that.
Oh and is this guy a commie or what? :)
i reckon the people that most likely be victimized by this are professional photographers, as they hate chimping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimping
When the "Corporate Squares" and advertising Companys get a hold of this it surely means.
'It's the end of the world as we know it" and all you peeps that think this is cool. In 10 years can sing along "..And I feel fine"
Cool idea... horrible video.
I second that they should have done some slow motion effects, the video showed nothing!
Really cool idea. I once saw something very similar. It does the same thing but doesn't automatically sync itself to the flash. A combination of these two devices may be able to wield a smaller easier to make device. Here is the sithttp://www.hactivist.com/flashpoint/
someone pulling off this prank en mass would truly be a jerk. thousands of dollars to fly across the ocean to have your picture of some famous artifact wrecked. reminds me of the fool hearted prank by gizmodo turning off equipment during a presentation...yes, just like that there are ways to prevent it (like using digital cameras) but should i have to use digital, lots of pros don't...
Superimposed text reads:
" Hundreds of people died last year by trying this at the US Mexico border "
Now it'd be cool if this was infrared, so all the people with nice SLR's would have absolutely no idea until they reviewed their pictures.
Wow, so many practical applications for this...and even more impractical ones :)
This would be great for the Olympics, all the news paper photos would be littered with a message of your choice. Hopefully something profound!
Funny how no one has picked up on the fact he's obviously a terrorist and he's really just scouting for good locations for picking off women and children for when he comes back the next day with a real weapon (RPG, rifle, bomb vest, etc).
"My name Ramballa. Today I has camera. Tomorrow I has bomb. Bye bye for you."
Be great to properly set up to prevent nice pictures of your car's license plate from being taken or possibly unreadable from toll booth/traffic signal cameras.
Holy crap! I think the music at the end is from that old creepy Dark Seed game. Awesome.
"OWNING A CAMERA AND TAKING BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOS DOESN'T MAKE YOU A PHOTOGRAPHER!"
erm, yes it does mate!
By definition, a photographer is a person who takes a photograph using a camera. It may not make them a great photographer, artist or a proffesional photographer, but they have still taken a photograph using a camera.
One word: Advertising.
you don't diss nerds with beards, ESPECIALLY on this site.
I could see museums using this.
I highly doubt it. Musuems, like the Louvre, spend fortunes getting lighting temperature etc absolutely correct to preserve paintings and artifacts, they aren't going to go project images onto them are they?
Besides Flash photography isn't allowed in most museums, especially the Louvre, so unlike in the image above, you wouldn't find anyway taking a picture of the Mona Lisa using a flash anyway.
Light shotgun!
i could see this being used when people are being given tours of places where they are asked to please not use flash photography (like in the caves i recently visited and had some jackass keep doing that in the near dark).
I can see the arrests now....
It's sad to see that Matisyahu has been forced to resort to cheap camera tricks to get attention. At least he lost that lame hat.
Just try going out in public with this thing and you're looking at a one-way trip to Gitmo. Make the damned thing small enough so you don't look like a friggin' terrorist.
I wonder if he works for Al Ghaede?
Is this even real? I have a HUGE question. Why didn't the video camera pick up the image?
I assume it's because it's activated by flash, and the video camera doesn't use flash.
I totally see this working at traffic lights - somebody is gonna inject art/commentary onto the back of passing cars as they run red lights - gotcha, traffic-cam.
I can see some good use for that thing - even if it does make the guy look like a terrorist.
PS: Louvre, paintings that can or have been damaged by flash or sunlight often have signs that request "no flash, please" and are usually put together in a room. The Mona Lisa is behind glass that reflects much of the light, and while your picture will most likely contain, glare, the glass doesn't necessarily ruin the shot.
PPS: All this attention on the Mona Lisa - there are pieces of art in the Louvre much, much more valuable just sitting out in the open. Eff her.
I would like to use this to project names of STDs across the foreheads of kids posing for myspace pictures.
I think you would get in serious trouble for projecting STDs onto kids' foreheads. Just don't get it in your eye.
Ive seen the so-called Fulgurator when it won its prize at ARS Electronica. Its total crap. The most interesting thing it reveals is the how little people understand technology. Even as Julius Von Bismarck was attempting to demonstrate it live, he had to ask members in the audience not to use their cameras as the flashes would stop it working. His well-practiced girlfriend managed to eventually capture an image which had been modified. Another intersting point is that the 'fulgurated' image of Obama which is being touted to support his 'Guerilla' tactics never turned up anywhere in the press.. could it be that no-one elses images were manipulated?
The 'device' is dependant on so many variables: Timing, recharge of flash unit, direction of sensor, exposure time of 'target camera', the fact that it needs to be dark... the list goes on.
Julius Von Bismarck (of Otto fame) claims he is going to patent his technology - well, sorry Julius, Cameras, Flash Bulbs, Projectors and Light Sensors are all patented.
I fail to understand why this is groundbreaking since it is basically a projector...and one that doesnt work very well either.
I have an invention too... it draws temporary graffiti on buidlings by stealth... its called 'OHP-Inside-A-Wig'.