Slashdot Mirror


Gigapixel Tapestries & Gigadecimal Pi

RobotWisdom writes "The new New Yorker magazine has posted two long non-technical articles about the Chudnovsky brothers and their homebrew supercomputers. One is a 1992 article about how they calculated pi to over two billion decimal places using a $70,000 cluster with 16 nodes. The other is a brandnew piece about how they spent months creating a seamless multi-gigabyte image of a fifteenth century tapestry for New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. Tapestries are essentially pixel-art on a non-rigid (cloth) matrix, so the manual labor of photographing it inch by inch had introduced many tiny deformations in the images, which they had to mathematically iron out. Old lo-res pix of the tapestries are on the Met's site, pix of the brothers are in the world brain."

6 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. If you're in New York by seringen · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're in New York, you should definitely check out the Cloisters, where the Unicorn Tapestries are held. It's right at the Northern Tip of Manhattan. A number of my friends have gone to the Met and not seen it, thinking that it'd be there. The Cloisters is probably the most stunning collection of medieval art in America in a very beautiful setting, so you should definitely check it out!

  2. April fools by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is this another April Fools article?

    David told me that they were working with I.B.M. to design what may be the world's most powerful supercomputer. The machine, code-named C64, is being built for a United States government agency.

    I mean, I loved my C64 too, but it's no supercomputer.

  3. The Cloisters at the Met by Speare · · Score: 5, Informative
    I was just at that museum to see the tapestries in question. I have a few high-resolution (multiple-image mosaic) photographs of the architectural elements on my Quick Pix Gallery. I also took and stitched images of almost every tapestry in the building, but have not posted them online at this time.

    It's a fascinating structure, with excellent pieces for close inspection. I encourage anyone within a couple hours drive of Manhattan to take the trip to see these in person. It's at the north end of Manhattan at Fort Tryon Park (there's also one high-resolution picture in my gallery from the park).

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
  4. The hardest technical problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...was breaking the tapestry's copy protection. Starting in the 14th century, nobility decreed all tapestries contain a pattern of knotting designed to prevent any scanning or printing of tapestries. By the end of the 14th century, all scanner and printer manufacturers had added this anti-tapestry copying technology into their products.

  5. Re:several months?? by leoval · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I disagree with your analogy. Aerial mosaics have nothing to do with the work that the brothers had to accomplish.

    For instance, in aerial photagraphy the landscape being photagraphed changes very little if it changes at all (most of the changes are not even perceptible at the resolution of the cameras). Therefore reconstructing the full image is pretty much trivial (finding the overlapping sections is straightforward).

    In this case, and from TA, the images changed from frame to frame! because of several factors, temperature, humidity, light conditions etc. Also the paper cover that the photographers used also disturbed the fine threading in the images. So determining the overlapping sections between tiles could not be easyly automated, in fact from the article it seems that they were not even discernible with the naked eye.

    I thing that the time spent in that project was actually productive, and that in the process a bunch of original algorithms were created (I hope they are published in some place).

  6. Re:Why? by jcupitt65 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    You can do very cool stuff with a good picture of the back of a tapestry.

    The colours in tapestries are usually vegetable dyes and they fade very badly with exposure to light. If you go around a museum, the tapestries almost always look dingy and you need to use a lot of imagination to try to picture how they might have originally looked.

    However the back of the tapestry has been kept in the dark and the colours there are still dazzling. So ... if you have a good picture of the front and the back and you can resample the back image to get it to line up with the front to within a knot size, you can use the back colour to "re-tint" the front image and get an excellent visualisation of how the tapestry might have appeared soon after it was woven (you need to take a bit of care with colour management too).

    A friend of mine did this as part of his PhD thesis. I can't find any of his images online (I guess there would be copyright problems), I'll see if I can dig some low-res ones up.