Say

October 17, 2003 12:21 PM

A Polaroid in a Polaroid in a Polaroid in a…
posted by Robot Johnny (23 comments total)

very Escheresque cool
posted by poopy at 12:31 PM on October 17, 2003

Nifty idea and nifty post.

However, what's with that blink tag on the first page?

I've seen some lousy uses of blink but that a weird one!
posted by anastasiav at 12:31 PM on October 17, 2003

Very cool. Wish I thought of it.
posted by sharpener at 12:37 PM on October 17, 2003

Polaroids being about the only camera I can operate.
posted by sharpener at 12:37 PM on October 17, 2003

Blink tag aside, that's turbo-cool.
posted by rocketman at 12:43 PM on October 17, 2003

Metacool
posted by Outlawyr at 12:52 PM on October 17, 2003

Holy Crap - That is so brilliant, I weep* not to have thought of it.

Excellent Find!

*or, I would weep if I wasn't such a cynical and unaffected type of person.
posted by willnot at 1:53 PM on October 17, 2003

Now, if only Matt would adopt this technique for the next ten years...
posted by piskycritter at 2:01 PM on October 17, 2003

Someone should definitely make a zooming movie of that. (If they start from the beginning and zoom out, they can continue to add onto it as he takes more photos...)
posted by waxpancake at 2:02 PM on October 17, 2003

There a zoomy type thing here. It may have been mentioned before.
The weird bit is trying to pick out a square edge.
posted by Flat Feet Pete at 2:22 PM on October 17, 2003

what browsers do you guys use that the Blink tag actually works?
posted by o2b at 2:30 PM on October 17, 2003

Firebird works fine.
posted by linux at 2:33 PM on October 17, 2003

Mozilla 1.4.1
posted by anastasiav at 2:50 PM on October 17, 2003

Great idea, but why the small image sizes? My question is really rhetorical, I think I know the answer, or some strong possibilities. It's a pity that the web--such a powerful potential exposure source for up-coming artists must be hobbled in fear of piracy.

True, I don't get free gorgeous duplications of this work--which begs the question of whether I would have otherwise bought it--but then I also don't even get to *see* the images in a reasonable size. Sort of self-defeating, don't you think?
posted by squirrel at 3:34 PM on October 17, 2003

squirrel - I didn't get the sense this was a commercial endeavor. I assume you know, but clicking on the thumbnails does load a slightly larger version of the image into the center frame. That larger images doesn't look too much smaller than a normal Polaroid would be. I suspect this is a matter of keeping it small so it loads a bit quicker and saves on drive space/bandwidth and the nature of the source medium.
posted by willnot at 3:44 PM on October 17, 2003

Reminds me of when I consider the generations that have passed before me. You can only make out what was in the polaroid originally for about three or four more photos. I don't know anything about my own heritage any farther back than three or four generations. It's the entire thing that's nice to look at. Perspective on perspective?

Also reminds me of those zooming fractals.

/these thoughts should be making me stoned...
posted by hellinskira at 4:13 PM on October 17, 2003

Cool link! hellinskira - try one of David Hockney's Polaroid collages.
posted by crunchburger at 4:27 PM on October 17, 2003

my friend has been doing this with his desktop wallpaper/digital camera for about 2 months now.....

Gives me a headache.
posted by Espoo2 at 5:49 PM on October 17, 2003

blink baby blink

I finaly gave up on IE a couple days ago and switch back to da moz.
posted by delmoi at 6:00 PM on October 17, 2003

Not cool. Just silly. Get an imagination.
posted by HTuttle at 12:32 AM on October 18, 2003

I think that it would be bad-ass if when he finished the project he went back to where the first picture was taken. Now that would blow my little mind.
posted by ao4047 at 8:49 AM on October 18, 2003

willnot, I don't know the artist's reason for not using a larger scan, I'm just speculating and lamenting. If the jpgs were bigger, we would probably get more of the intended effect, don't you think?

I find it ironic that the same technology (hi-rez scanning) that enables an expansion of this medium beyond the previous confines is also seen as a liability.

Also, what HTuttle said. Not that original, once you're seen the cover of Memento.
posted by squirrel at 11:46 AM on October 18, 2003

So, what -- you're saying that this guy ripped off the idea from a movie poster that wouldn't be out for another four years?
posted by webmutant at 12:30 PM on October 19, 2003