Homer Simpson Drawn With Web 2.0-Style ASCII Art 160
Posted
by
timothy
from the should-be-an-online-convertor-for-this dept.
from the should-be-an-online-convertor-for-this dept.
boogi78 writes "Remember ASCII art? This is the Web 2.0 CSS version of ASCII art featuring Homer Simpson. Here is a CSS G.W. Bush. There's also an program that automatically converts jpegs into 'CSS images,' but it's a Windows executable. I found no sources for it, but I got it to work with WINE."
art? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Original Thread (Score:4, Informative)
http://pouet.net/topic.php?which=5204&page=1 [pouet.net]
Seen this long ago for Mac OS X (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Seen this long ago for Mac OS X (Score:5, Insightful)
Seen it longer ago (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Those don't require fancy schmancy lyebraries nor nutin!
Re:Seen this long ago for Mac OS X (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Gestapo blocking jpegs? Get someone to convert it to an ascii format and render it in the browser.
Re:Seen this long ago for Mac OS X (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, this is a bit different - and much more unique and impressive, IMHO. I can't get to the first link (slashdotted already), but the Bush portrait and this Homer [romancortes.com] are both made using overlapping bits of various font characters, sized and colored using CSS, to make the curves and lines of the picture.
View source on that Homer "image" to see what I mean - the artist basically used font characters as a palette of vectors, and clipped out just the partial shape of each character that he wanted, using CSS properties.
As a result, instead of bloating to many MB, that Homer picture is only ~16KB. Bush is only ~32KB.
Translating pixels into an HTML table is not that interesting now.. I mean, I was excited when my brother wrote an app to do that about 8 years ago, and I even wrote a little companion app that parsed ANSI escape sequences and turned ANSI art into HTML tables too, but that was back then. :)
This, on the other hand, is really original and unique. I'm pretty impressed by it.
Scales up really well (Score:4, Interesting)
But of course, properly implemented SVG would do that just as well. It just lacks the super-geekiness of using something in an unintended way to get a useful result. And, of course, this way might have better support in some browsers than SVG.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
http://nedbatchelder.com/blog/200805/css_homer_animated.html [nedbatchelder.com]
(apparently the site is down, someone must have already linked it from somewhere that drives traffic)
Re: (Score:2)
The software author's example [romancortes.com] with image.jpg goes from 13322 to 42564 as CSS output.
Less resolution, bigger size, doesn't make sense to me, other than a cool hack. It's a step above, but much like the mplayer + aalib [liquidweather.net] ascii output for video. It's really not that useful, unless you want to play videos on a 486 or something
Re: (Score:2)
> take up more space to store the CSS version than the original JPG.
How about an apples-to-apples comparo? That's probably not an uncompressed (dcam-style) JPG -- so let's compress the CSS. Pretty much any browser more recent than Netscape Navigator 2 will handle deflate.
Re: (Score:2)
If so would it defeat the captcha breaking algorithms, after all you could not process it as an image and processing the source without it being rendered would be damn near impossible.
Thoughts?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing like having my portrait done in CSS (Score:5, Funny)
Web 2.0? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Web 2.0? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Web 2.0? (Score:5, Funny)
But don't hold your breath waiting...
Re:Web 2.0? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Web 3.141 ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
** Yes, "AJAX", not "Ajax". It's an acronym, and no amount of "omg let's make it sound more amazing than it really is by making it a normal-lookin
Re:Web 2.0? (Score:5, Interesting)
Carry on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if you mean specifically using the XMLHttpRequest object.
Personally, I've been using hidden iFrames (and/or <img> tags) and document.write (in the pre DOM 2.0 days) to accomplish the same thing since the late 90s.
I wrote a tiny framework (which I named Jespecial, a name I still like more than AJAX) in both PHP4 and ASP that would take a server-side array and create a JavaScript array out of it. The array would be pus
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Web 2.0? (Score:5, Informative)
Recommend those curious read O'Reilly's definition here:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html [oreillynet.com].
Since he coined it, he's probably pretty accurate. A lot of it generally includes user-generated content and the transition from single publisher sites (NYTimes) to community driven sites (blogs, Yelp!, etc.)
Here's a table he uses to explain the difference:
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
However, if you add some XML in there somewhere, it should qualify.
I find it unlikely that anyone counting BitTorrent as a Web application is particularly accurate. Unless, of course, he meant the BitTorrent sites, but how are those principally different from a forum where you could post links to ?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That definition is 5 pages long. No wonder no one knows what it is. Or perhaps "definition" is not really the word you're looking. "Description" would perhaps be a better word.
From the O'Reilly article:
Sounds kinda fuzzy to me. At any rate it's kind of like the words "gay" and "hacker." They don't mean what they used to mean and you can't really do mu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It almost as bad as "Information super highway"
Re: (Score:1)
On the plus side.. (Score:2)
Of course, in a heterogeneous environment, the developers won't touch native clients with a teen foot pole...
Re: (Score:2)
It's an information tube...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
mid-90s? I swear I saw all that in MySpace just the other day
Only one thing to say about this rubbish... (Score:2, Funny)
Bored? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bored? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bored? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they should start employing computer people to keep them out of trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(don't use so many caps. It's like Steve Ballmer.)
Looks like Prodigy art (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
NTCA38A... Sad that I remember that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Slashdotted (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing to see... (Score:2)
If you are the site owner please contact your system administrator.
Yeah, those are ASCII characters.
Coming Soon: Cmdr Taco's Son's Fingerpaintings (Score:1)
But it's Web2.0, so it must be kewl.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Great, now I'm gonna have nightmares. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
I really expected teh bush one to be (Score:2, Funny)
and I would have felt it was a good likeness.
Remember the printer art? (Score:2)
I must have been desperate back then...
Can't get it to work (Score:1)
Working Link (Score:3, Informative)
Nothing to see here, move along (Score:5, Informative)
Here's how i see it: http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/9183/homeraz4.png [imageshack.us]
Re: (Score:1)
o.O
It does work across multiple platforms. Any platform that supports TrueType fonts, which is more than one, hence "multiple".
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What ugly browser do you use?
Homer (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The return of RIPscript? (Score:1)
Front page perfection (Score:3, Funny)
zooming - change text size in browser (Score:2)
Web 2.0? (Score:1)
http://www.dogmatix.com/dk.html [dogmatix.com]
But can I block it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think I know what Homer would say (Score:1)
ASCII art is still so great, especially on forums and such where it's too much hassle [or you aren't allowed] to post images.
SVG is dead! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How can that be Web 2.0 and Windows? (Score:2)
How is it possible for something that is WEB 2.0 be only available under Windows or WINE? Seems like a contradiction in terms. I thought Web 2.0 was a new thing that was even more platform independent than ever before.
ASCII Simpsons were my usenet crazelet! (Score:2)
Control-a on the Bush Picture (Score:2, Funny)
Slashdot owes me the cost of two ibuprofen. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do the world a favor: smack anyone who uses the phrase "web two point oh" in a conversation. Smack them. Smack them hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This tool is _so cool_ (Score:3, Funny)
I attach them as HTML source inside text/plain MIME sections
Nerdy friends then get annoyed at my email-incompetence, save them as
Whooo hoooo
Now... who else can I goatse?
How did Asciicam not get mentioned? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:heh, slashdotted already... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Disappointing. I was expecting the picture to move, rather than fade in like that.
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)