Slashdot Mirror


"Universal Jigsaw Puzzle" Hits Stores In Japan

Riktov writes "I came across this at a Tokyo toy store last week, and it's one of the coolest things I've seen in a long time. Jigazo Puzzle is a jigsaw puzzle, but you can make anything with it. It has just 300 pieces which are all just varying shades of a single color, though a few have gradations across the piece; i.e., each piece is a generic pixel. Out of the box, you can make Mona Lisa, JFK, etc, arranging it according to symbols printed on the reverse side. But here's the amazing thing: take a photo (for example, of yourself) with a cell-phone, e-mail it to the company, and they will send you back a pattern that will recreate that photo. This article is in Japanese, but as they say, a few pictures are worth a million words. And 300 pixels are worth an infinite number of pictures."

53 of 241 comments (clear)

  1. Looks familiar by aBaldrich · · Score: 2, Funny

    The puzzle version of ascii art?

    --
    In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    1. Re:Looks familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Racist!

  2. infinite? by token_username · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More like 300! I'd say.

    1. Re:infinite? by token_username · · Score: 4, Informative

      ! means factorial dude.

    2. Re:infinite? by Zocalo · · Score: 3, Informative
      Not necessarily. There are 300! sequences of the pieces, but you also need to allow for a few more variables:
      • Rotation of pieces that are non-uniform in colour
      • Multiple arrangements - 15x20, 10x30, images etc.
      • Not using all the pieces - a 17x17 image for instance
      • Combining multiple sets of the same colour
      • Combining multiple sets of different colours

      OK, the last two are technically cheating, and all but the first option would possibly require custom code since all the example images appear to be 15x20 portraits, but a suitable algorithm probably wouldn't be that hard to figure out. I saw this on Firehose last night and worked out a few likely routines this morning, so I'd expect some custom FL/OSS code (and cheap Chinese manufactured knock-offs) to be available in fairly short order. After that the race will be on to create the largest most impressive image before the fad inevitably passes.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    3. Re:infinite? by nneonneo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Assuming all pieces are used, and that none of the pieces are symmetric or identical (that is, all pieces are different, and each rotation is different), then the actual number of possible images comes out to:

      9*(4^300)*(300!)

      where 9 is for the number of possible rectangles (1x300 up to 15x20), 4^300 accounts for the rotations of each piece, and 300! accounts for their arrangement.

      The result, according to Python, works out to around 1.143*10^796, which is large, but not infinite.

    4. Re:infinite? by 1729 · · Score: 3, Informative

      there was a exclamation mark. 300 factorial, 300 x 299 x 298 x 297x ... x 2 x 1.

      Incidentally, if anyone wants to calculate that, you'll need to use a float, and probably a double-, or quadruple-precision (YMMV) one at that.

      If you're computing an integer-valued function, the result should be an integer. In Python, which uses arbitrary precision integers by default, it's as simple as:

      >>> import math
      >>> math.factorial(300)
      306057512... [truncated to get past the lameness filter]

    5. Re:infinite? by jameskojiro · · Score: 3, Funny

      But 41,000,000,000 is the largest number in Maths.

      Some have speculated there may be a larger number: 41,000,000,001?

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    6. Re:infinite? by itslifejimbutnotaswe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Who says you have to use all the pieces? You'd also need include all the other sizes that one could produce with few pieces (and then the selection of that subset of pieces...

    7. Re:infinite? by rockNme2349 · · Score: 2, Funny

      if you allow arbitrary separation then the number of combinations is infinite.

      +3 Interesting? Really?

      It could only have been worse if it was Informative.

      --
      Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
    8. Re:infinite? by Tacvek · · Score: 2, Informative

      306 057 512 216 440 636 035 370 461 297 268 629 388 588 804 173 576 999 416 776 741 259 476 533 176 716 867 465 515 291 422 477 573 349 939 147 888 701 726 368 864 263 907 759 003 154 226 842 927 906 974 559 841 225 476 930 271 954 604 008 012 215 776 252 176 854 255 965 356 903 506 788 725 264 321 896 264 299 365 204 576 448 830 388 909 753 943 489 625 436 053 225 980 776 521 270 822 437 639 449 120 128 678 675 368 305 712 293 681 943 649 956 460 498 166 450 227 716 500 185 176 546 469 340 112 226 034 729 724 066 333 258 583 506 870 150 169 794 168 850 353 752 137 554 910 289 126 407 157 154 830 282 284 937 952 636 580 145 235 233 156 936 482 233 436 799 254 594 095 276 820 608 062 232 812 387 383 880 817 049 600 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    9. Re:infinite? by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The result, according to Python, works out to around 1.143*10^796, which is large, but not infinite.

      37 minutes.

      As I read "infinite" in the summary, I thought "OK, let's see how long it takes for one of these yahoos to calculate how many combinations there really are", since it is of course not infinite. The post went up at 6:02pm, and the parent of this post went up at 6:39pm. Congratulations :)

    10. Re:infinite? by derGoldstein · · Score: 4, Funny

      You people and your "math speak"... Maybe he was just excited to type the number 300? Did you ever consider that? Huh?

      Also, he could have meant the bitwise operation. Which means it could have been interpreted as "300... NOT!".
      Broaden your horizon, dude.

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    11. Re:infinite? by derGoldstein · · Score: 4, Funny

      Higher precision, please.

      --
      Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
    12. Re:infinite? by Entropy98 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The result, according to Python, works out to around 1.143*10^796, which is large, but not infinite.

      This brings up an interesting point. Although infinities exist, there are some things that are very large, but not infinite.

      Take a 1 or 2 mega-pixel image (or bigger or smaller). There is a finite number of possibilities. It is almost like there is a finite amount of things to see. What if you had time to see all those?

      The same applies to DVDs, or Blu-rays. What if you had time to see every possible DVD?

      Would there be anything left to see?

      If my computer could create truly random videos I guess with enough time I would get Star Wars on Blu-ray.

    13. Re:infinite? by ed314159 · · Score: 2, Funny

      They say that a picture is worth a thousand words. However, if we consider that a word is 16 bits and therefore has 2^(16) possible states, 1.143*10^796=2^(16*w) => w = 71.8 Apparently, a picture is worth less than a hundred words. Who knew?

    14. Re:infinite? by LordKronos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At first I thought the number was wrong because of all the zeros at the end, then it quickly dawned on me that with all the 10s and 5s you should expect a bunch of zeros. However, trying to verify the quantity of zeros, I'm having trouble figuring out where they come from (I double checked with perl's Math::BigInt library, and your number is correct...or at least the quantity of zeros is).

      There are 74 zeros there. Obviously we can expect 1 zero for each multiple of 10 we multiply by (so that's 30 zeros), plus 100, 200, and 300 each give an additional 0 (thats 3 more zeros). We also get a zero for each 5 that's multiplied by a 2, 4, 6, or 8, though we're limited by the number of 5's so it doesn't matter which number you choose (that gives us 30 more zeros).

      So, we've got 30 + 3 + 30 = 63 zeros. Where do the other 11 come from? I'm feeling kind of dumb about it (probably overlooking something very obvious), but I just can't figure it out.

    15. Re:infinite? by LordKronos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It figures....I thought about this a long time before submitting and couldn't come up with anything. As soon as I submit, it dawned on me that each multiple of 25 actually counts as an extra 5, though the multiples of 100 already exhibit the extra 5. So we get 25, 50, 75, 125, 150, 175, 225, 250, and 275 giving 9 more zeros. 2 left to go. 125 and 250 also count as a third 5, so that's our last two.

      That was a fun and pointless exercise.

  3. Sweet by Narpak · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now tell me the pattern for creating an image of unspeakable evil; like the Great Cthulhu.
    Cthulhu fhtagn! Cthulhu fhtagn! Ia! Ia! Ia! The sleeper awakens!

    1. Re:Sweet by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Informative

      Impossible. Anyone who had seen the image would be a gibbering heap of insanity, and unable to tell you the pattern. At best you could hope to get enough clues to figure out the pattern yourself... but if you assembled it, you'd either off yourself or also turn into a quivering mass of human flesh.

      The key here is to get someone else to assemble the image... you'd find a likely mark (some kind of paranormal investigator, for instance) and then mislead him into thinking the image he's assembling will *stop* the summoning of Cthulhu. Drop enough clues in the right places, use decoys to mislead him of your true intentions, let him be an ignorant pawn in your great game. With luck and skill, you can get him to do the dirty work for you. And the irony of him contributing to the Great Awakening by striving against it is quite delicious.

      At least, that's the way I'd do it. Your way is too direct, and not worthy of true evil genius.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:Sweet by CptPicard · · Score: 5, Funny

      You must be new here, it should be obvious. Send the company a picture of goatse, and have your pattern...

      --
      I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
    3. Re:Sweet by SEWilco · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What did the Germans come up with? I bet it was so well documented that it couldn't send anybody mad.

      We couldn't find their puzzle among the puzzle pieces of Berlin. We did find the documentation, but unfortunately that's enough to drive men mad also.

    4. Re:Sweet by fru1tcake · · Score: 2, Funny

      Better still, send them a link that points to goatse, but then redirects to a Youtube clip of Cthulhu singing Rick Astley's "Never Gonna Give You Up". That'll show em!

      --
      It's not a bug, it's a lepidopter!
  4. Re:puzzle? by Toonol · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a puzzle when you have a specific image you're recreating. If you aren't, it is then just a toy... or perhaps an artistic medium.

  5. Well... not infinite. by pwnies · · Score: 4, Funny

    And 300 pixels are worth 3.060575122 * 10^614 pictures

    Fixed that for you.

    1. Re:Well... not infinite. by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And 300 pixels are worth 3.060575122 * 10^614 pictures

      Most of which will resemble little more than random noise and have no value.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    2. Re:Well... not infinite. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't it 300! (number of complete board possibilities) * 4^300 (rotations of all pieces)

      1200! implies after you place one a certain way, you have 1199 more possibilities, which is untrue; you have 1196.

      1200 * 1196 * ... :)

  6. JPEG by Quietust · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems remarkably similar to how JPEG compression works. Not surprisingly, the resulting pictures look a lot like overcompressed JPEGs.

    --
    * Q
    P.S. If you don't get this note, let me know and I'll write you another.
    1. Re:JPEG by nneonneo · · Score: 5, Informative

      JPEG chunks an image into 8x8 blocks. An overcompressed JPEG contains so little information per block that the blocks devolve into simple gradient patterns (try this yourself with a grayscale image: save it with a quality near "0" and you will see the individual blocks clearly). If you think about it a bit, this makes sense: the block is being approximated by a combination of a small number of cosine waves (in the limit, it's a single wave along each image dimension), so the result is a gradient, because most of the coefficients have been thrown out by compression.

      In this sense, the puzzle pieces can be thought of as representing these simple block patterns. With a 15x20 rectangle of pieces, by JPEG standards, this is essentially an overcompressed 120x160 image. You'll note that if you take your overcompressed JPEG and scale it down to around 25% (30x40), then, provided the original image shows only a single subject, it should still be reasonably recognizable, because the human visual system patches together the pieces to produce a coherent image, even if it is highly distorted.

    2. Re:JPEG by nneonneo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wikipedia explains it fairly well, though it is still a bit technical. The Huffman coding details are not important to the main idea; what is important is the concept of using the Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT) and a subsequent quantization step to reduce the precision, and therefore size, of the high-frequency components.

      At extreme compression levels, only a few of the patterns in this image will end up with non-zero coefficients: specifically, those which are low-frequency (in the top left corner). You'll notice that these also happen to resemble gradients, which is what I meant when I said that the 8x8 blocks devolve into simple gradients.

  7. a few pictures are worth a million words by Bourdain · · Score: 5, Funny

    a few pictures are worth a million words

    Especially when the accompanying text is in Japanese and I can't read it

    1. Re:a few pictures are worth a million words by ELitwin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why is this modded funny? The full quote is "This article is in Japanese, but as they say, a few pictures are worth a million words." Am I missing something?

    2. Re:a few pictures are worth a million words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Moreover, not only their faces can also face other people. Even great men in history, even heterosexual love, even in the face of the pet ... "If life on Earth, even in the face any" I would make! What kind of mechanism and say something, but ... Well anyway, let's say that you actually try.

      I happen to read Japanese fluently, but this was worth it.

  8. Not quite. by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It appears to be monochromatic and it also used nearest-approximation algorithms... Which means that the extra pieces are inserted as "random noise" once the general shapes are mapped out. Clever, but... low resolution.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Not quite. by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It essentially has a fixed histogram. I wonder what you'd get back from them if you sent them an image specifically designed to be hard to fit into that histogram...

  9. Wow by esocid · · Score: 4, Funny

    You can even make a 404 error out of it!

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
  10. Re:puzzle? by sexconker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Puzzles require thinking and solving.
    This is a cardboard version of pixelblocks.

    http://www.pixelblocks.com/

  11. Re:puzzle? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had something similar as a kid, but there were two colors of varying saturation. Grey (from black to white), and gold (from almost white to intensely saturated). The pieces were different shapes, though, so there was a puzzle aspect to it, though all the pieces were some number of squares in different configurations (like tetris pieces, but more shapes in different sizes of 1 to 10 or so squares).

    It came with a few patterns to copy from (tiger, city landscape, I can't recall the others, since I never did them).

    Unfortunately, there was no www at the time, so no website to submit pictures to for patterns. One of my brothers did make some nice pictures based on photographs.

    The memory is a bit hazy, but I know the company that made it was asian (I remember there were pictograms and poorly translate English on the box).

    I know, I know -- cool story bro.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  12. Re:puzzle? by Kagura · · Score: 4, Informative

    I saw this at Tokyu Hands a couple days ago. Now I know what it was. The picture is only just barely similar to whatever photo you send them when you look up close. You have to view it from far away to have it appear to have the detail of the photo.

  13. Re:Oh Come ON!!! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The maximum number of ways you can arrange 300 things is 300!, or about 3.06 X 10^614. Granted a very large number, but definitely not infinite.

    Okay but what if there were 301 pixels, would that be infinite?

    And anyway, since pedantry loves company, I'll point out that 300! is the maximum number of orderings of 300 things, not necessarily the maximum number of arrangements. How many arrangements there are depends on what you consider the "rules" for a free-form puzzle like this. Since the pieces do have interlocking teeth I'm going to say that minimally the pieces have to be interlocked (otherwise the possible arrangements truly would be infinite to the extent the universe is), but beyond that does it have to have a specific geometry like 15x20? Does it even have to be rectangular, or can it more resemble a game of dominoes?

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  14. For those without a decent calculator... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    300! (factorial) ~= 3.06 x 10^614

    That's how many combinations there are, if each piece is unique and is used in the same 15x20 grid each time.

    To put that in perspective, there are only about 10^80 atoms in the universe. You would need 2042 bits to represent that number in binary.

    So yeah. For all intents and purposes, that's limitless.

  15. It's just a bad compression algorithm by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Informative

    but you can make anything with it. That's like saying you can convert any picture to a 15 by 20 pixel JPEG; technically you can, but the usually the result isn't worth looking at. That said, I'm sure a lot of people will send in pr0n to convert into patterns, just to see what it looks like in ultra-low resolution monochrome.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  16. wasgij puzzle by gurps_npc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the opposite of a jigsaw puzzle, so I call it a wasgij puzzle. Jigsaw puzzles only fit one way and you use the picture to aid you in fitting the pieces. This wasgij puzzle fit any way you want and you fit them together to form the picture you desire.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  17. Re:puzzle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds much like oil painting. Up close it looks like crap, but stand a few feet back and it looks great.

  18. do not taunt happy fun puzzle by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Funny

    It essentially has a fixed histogram. I wonder what you'd get back from them if you sent them an image specifically designed to be hard to fit into that histogram...

    A squad comprised of a Ninja, a gradeschool girl with magical superpowers, a vampire, and a giant robot. On your doorstep. With a note that politely says, "Do not taunt happy fun puzzle."

  19. Lego Mosaic by LoudMusic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seems an awful lot like the Lego mosaics that people make. Lego also did a mosaic product for a while where you could upload an image and they would send you parts and instructions for making the image with 1x1 Lego plates.

    I believe there is even software now to make the 'maps' yourself, much like cross-stitch, etc.

    --
    No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
  20. 120x160 by StreetStealth · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mod parent up.

    It's the gradients on the pieces, and the principles of human vision that JPEG takes advantage of, that give this puzzle its cool effect, creating the appearance of a much higher resolution than the 15x20 "pixels" everyone else is referring to.

    You can't make a (easily) recognizable Mona Lisa in 15x20 pixels. You can in 15x20 cosine gradients.

    --
    Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
  21. Re:puzzle? by shentino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd swear that it almost looks like a tool to teach someone about basic JPEG encoding.

  22. Re:love the name by Riktov · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Jigazo" means "self-portrait" in Japanese. Clever naming.

  23. Re:Legos? by Riktov · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What makes this different from Legos, pixelblocks, ASCII art, or even a JPEG image, is that the selection of pixels/pieces is predetermined, limited, and they must all be used to make the image. For all those other forms you're allowed to pick the closest color value for each pixel.

    With this puzzle, supposing you did it manually, scanning row by row, and picking the best-fitting piece for each pixel. It'll look great at first, but soon you'll be running out of good matches and having to choose less and less optimal pieces; you can't say "give me a 45% with a sideways gradient" when you've used them all up. So the algorithm has to consider how to distribute all the pieces throughout the image for the optimum match.

  24. But it's not a puzzle anymore! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There are no differing nipples and holes anymore, so you can’t fail anymore. Which means that you can put it together in a wrong way without noticing. Oh, wait, there is a list of how to put it together, killing the whole point of putting a puzzle together.

    I don’t think that that way it will have any chances, after this little hype is over.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  25. Re:300!? by MtlDty · · Score: 2, Funny

    No, this is Sparta

  26. Translation by mattr · · Score: 2, Informative

    FWIW it says take a photo with your cell phone, send it in and the response arrives.
    They have variations in sepia, wine red, midnight blue, and a puzzle game -- but all are sold out.

    By the way JIGAZO actually is how you read the three character name, which means "your own image" or maybe "self portrait image".

    Here is what the separate white panel looks like:
    here

    And here is a blog, showing the process: "I made the Jigazo puzzle!"
    I'm not going to translate it entirely, but he says the pieces are nice and thick, and well formed. Also there is a guide image on the back of each piece and also, a light version of it is shown on the front of the piece as well so it's easy to understand.
    It comes out looking quite good, the key is to look at it as if looking far away, with squinty eyes. ;)
    It took him 90 minutes to make his first one, then the second time he got faster.

    Translation..

    Use the 300 pieces in the box and you can make anybody's face.
    First in the World, a jigsaw puzzle that can do your face!
    Jigazo Puzzle

    Can you believe it?!
    All the sample images shown here were made with the same 300 pieces.
    In order to make your own face...
    When you send a photo by cell phone email a response image will be sent back immediately.
    Just put the pieces together the way it shows and voila!

    By repositioning the same 300 pieces you can make images as varied as these!
    1. Send your image to the email address printed in the included instruction manual
    2. A response image with the answer arrives in your cell phone
    3. When you line up the 300 pieces according to that, then your face is complete. You can use anyone's face!

    (small print)
    Sending your photo, and receiving the response image will incur packet communications charges according to your cell phone service provider's contract.
    If you are going to be using it repeatedly, we recommend you use your service provider's fixed price unlimited packet plan.
    Note that the creation of the response image by our company is without cost no matter how many times you use it.

    Set contents
    300 piece puzzle. Color of pieces differs depending on the set type.
    Piece set-up tray
    Starch adhesive and applicator spatula (or something like that)
    Manual. Includes instruction images for the Mona Lisa, Girl with Pearl Earrings, Natsume Soseki (the author), Kennedy (JFK), President Obama, Beethoven's face. You can immediately start playing with these faces without using a cell phone.

    Other things you need:
    A cell phone with camera functionality, from NTT DoCoMo, AU, Softbank Mobile (Disney Mobile and iPhone also included).
    * When displaying your finished puzzle, please use separately sold 300 piece (white) panel specially for JIGAZO puzzles.

    Price is 1890 yen, a bit over 20 bucks.

    JIGAZO FAQ

    Q1. When I send in a portrait photo with my cell phone, do you mail me back a finished puzzle?
    A. No, that is incorrect. Your face is created only out of the 300 pieces in the box.

    Q2. How do you do that?
    A. There are 300 pieces in the box with slightly different tones.A program finds the tones closest to those of your face and sends back to your cell phone a response image specially for your face.

    Q3. How quickly does the response image get sent back?
    A. It depends on the state of the communications network, but in about 10 seconds it should be sent back and then you can immediately start playing.

    Q4. How do you put the puzzle together?
    A. Each of the pieces has a hint image on it, so you position the pieces as shown by the response animation. Enjoy watching your face gradually start to appear.

    Q5. Can I only put the pieces together once?
    A. No, you can redo it any number of times, and make anyone's face.You can pl