The Fulgurator fulgurates (?) subliminal messages on photographs
Berlin-based artist Julius von Bismarck has invented the Image Fulgurator... a camera-like device that implants messages in a sub-visible spectrum on its object. These messages are invisible to the naked eye, but are clearly visible when photographed. Naturally, as an artist, he's using the device primarily to mess with tourists and flash them non-sensical political statements they could care less about.
That would usually honk me off, but if you watch the video (a bit long, scored by a series of musical blorps), he's using it to fuck with people at the Checkpoint Charlie Museum... which is a historically inaccurate sham, Berlin's own Cold-War-themed answer to Disneyworld. How bad is it? It's not located on the original site of Checkpoint Charlie. Everything about it is a recreation... and a ludicrously botched one, at that. For example, depending on which direction you approach it, you will either see a huge picture of a GI (welcoming you to the West) or a picture of a Russian soldier (welcoming you to the East, comrade). The Russian soldier is wearing military insignia that makes him four different military ranks at the same time.
On one hand, who cares if people vacationing in Berlin take pictures and enjoy themselves at an iconic site that just happens to be a totally manufactured tourist attraction? But it rankles, somehow. I got a kick out of his prank, the mystified double-takes of his unwitting victims. I hope for his sake, though, he doesn't try aiming his suspiciously gun-like device at any real monuments, though.
The Fulgurator [Julius von Bismarck via MAKE]
Update: Charlie Sorrel has an interview with the Fulgurator's inventor, Julius von Bismarck. [Gadget Lab]
the latest
latest episodes
I guess if you are going to repost a post on the mother boing, you had better make it...ummm...better. Well done. As a photographer, I find actually find this hilarious. Until I happens to me I guess. The Checkpoint Charlie 'area' is a travesty, I admit. Having been at the wall when it came down, I can only say shame shame shame.
Can anyone tell me if the image that is created by the artist has to be red, has to be solid (as opposed to having gradation) and how photo-realistic, albeit monochromatic, it can be?
It's clearly exploiting unsuspecting people, but I love it. It's part prank, part interactive-performance art and when we see the image it creates, it can be enjoyed as a final product.
I would more inclined to subvert others with sexual or other taboo imagery than any kind of political jargon, say, like what the fictional Tyler Durden would do at the movie theater's film.
If he comes to the U.S., I would probably stay away from bridge and tunnel openings.
What have they done to checkpoint charlie? The museum has always been right where it is now - southeast corner of Kochstrasse and Zimmerstrasse. The booth that the allies used (due south of the intersection) was moved in the early '80's, most of the East German buildings (north of the intersection) were taken down thereafter...what have they put in its place?
But the museum itself? That's always been there.
This is one those projects that seems funny in conception, but on further consideration is kind of a dick move AND could be easily approriated by the very sorts of people and institutions the artist is presumably railing against. As someone posted on the main blog, if this is at all viable it will quickly be snapped up to stick in MORE advertising.
I can see how this would be a way to 'enforce copyight' in a way... you take a picture of something and the image you have is totally marred by this type of technology which is seen by the camera but not the human eye. Imagine taking a picture of a sign and the image is covered in (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) NO PHOTOGRAPHS (C)(C) obscuring the object/sign you took an image of.
...implants messages in a sub-visible spectrum...
I highly doubt it. The messages are implanted for a very short period (a ten-thousandth of a second-ish), but there's no reason to think that he's using anything but the perfectly visible spectrum.
@1 Thanks for the kind words, but, to be fair, Mark posted his only three minutes before I did mine... so it's more like it was posted simultaneously. Also, we're a different site... we're allowed to post things that also get up on BB proper. Sorry, I just like to underline that from time to time.
I definitely see it being appropriated for advertising or to prevent usable pictures from being taken.
I can imagine taking a picture of Disney World and seeing an image of Tinkerbell above it or something too...
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' and the assumption that the camera generating the trigger flash is pointing at the same thing... the chances of it working are miniscule!
Julius Von Bismarck also 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'.