Slashdot Mirror


How One Photographer Is Hacking the Concept of Time

An anonymous reader writes "Hungarian photographer Adam Magyar doesn't work like most artists. He takes the world's most sophisticated photographic equipment, then hacks it with software he writes himself — all in order to twist our perception of time inside out. In this latest story from the digital publisher MATTER, Joshua Hammer discovers how Magyar's unique combination of technology and art challenges the way we understand the world. At one point, Magyar realized he needed a 'slit-scan' camera, 'the type used to determine photo finishes at racetracks and at Olympic sporting events by capturing a time sequence in one image. Such cameras were rare and cost many thousands of dollars, so Magyar set out to build one himself. He joined a medium-format camera lens to another sensor and wrote his own software for the new device. Total cost: $50. He inverted the traditional scanning method, where the sensor moves across a stationary object. This time, the sensor would remain still while the scanned objects were in motion, being photographed one consecutive pixel-wide strip at a time. (This is the basic principle of the photo-finish camera.) Magyar mounted the device on a tripod in a busy Shanghai neighborhood and scanned pedestrians as they passed in front of the sensor. He then digitally combined over 100,000 sequential strips into high-resolution photographs.' There are pictures and videos interspersed throughout the article."

8 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. He's Hungarian and his last name is Magyar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So his last name is "Hungary" in Hungarian? What an amazing coincidence! Like Lou Gehrig .. what are the odds that he got the disease named "Lou Gehrig's Disease"!

    (I got nothing)

  2. Re:$50...if your time is worth nothing by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm glad he gets out more than the stereotypical slashdot developer. I would imagine that a series of slit scan camera shots of a basement and the action in there would be quite boring.

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  3. Re:$50...if your time is worth nothing by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As long as it doesn't take away from another activity, then the cost of time is nothing. If this were not the case, then it would never be cheaper to cook at home rather than go to a restaurant.

  4. Where the fun in that? by future+assassin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously even though people do things I could care less for, its awesome to see what "ONE" person can do and how imaginative they can be. Stuff like this is what use to drive me to "build" things when I was kid. Damn all those days drooling over parts and tools at Radio Shack.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  5. 2001: A Space Odyssey by E++99 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the same photographic technique used to create the stargate special effects in 2001: A Space Odyssey, but putting the camera on a trolley and zooming it in. Here's a really good video on the evolution of the technology. http://youtu.be/KhRo2WbWnKU

    For artistic slit scan photography, check out Jay Mark Johnson's work. It's much more interesting than this stuff, imo.

  6. Re:$50...if your time is worth nothing by icebike · · Score: 5, Funny

    So if I buy a bicycle instead of that Bugatti Veyron I've been lusting for, it means I have a tax problem because of that $1,700,000 profit, (minus the cost of the bicycle)?

    Brilliant!
    All the government's budget deficit problems were nothing but an accounting error!

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  7. Re:huh... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not so much "Hacking the Concept of Time" as "Hacking camera software to change how it takes pictures"

    Let me guess, you either didn't read the article, or didn't understand it:

    Magyar mounted the device on a tripod in a busy Shanghai neighborhood and scanned pedestrians as they passed in front of the sensor. He then digitally combined over 100,000 sequential strips into high-resolution photographs.

    He's not taking a single exposure. He's taking a very large amount of small slices over a span of time, and stitching them together into a single image.

    He hasn't so much taken a 'snapshot in time' like a traditional camera, he's made images out of snapshots which occurred across time.

    Which means he's taking objects going by at a pretty good clip, and combining a whole lot of them into something which looks like a single astounding image.

    Some of his images have a time lapse quality to them, because they show things which are both in motion and still, over a time sequence:

    Eerie distortions of objects in motion and at rest reminded viewers that they were looking at a pictorial representation of time, not space. Speeding buses were compressed into Smart cars. Individuals who paused at a bus stop were elongated like Metroliners. Slower walkers had billowing pants legs, or feet like skis, or Oscar Pistorius-style blades. And because of the peculiar nature of the scanning technology, everyone was moving in the same direction. "The horizontal axis is not about space, it's not about left and right, it's about earlier and later," he says. "If two people are crossing the pixel at the same moment, they will look like they are walking together."

    If you read the article, you'll find he's done much much more than "Hacking camera software to change how it takes pictures" -- the resulting images look like a still frame, but are composited from a time lapse, and are MUCH more sophisticated than you seem to realize.

    Why do people on Slashdot persist in dismissing things they don't really understand? What he's done is taken what look like still images, but are in fact a cross section in time.

    That you think all he's done is to hack camera software means you don't have the barest idea of what it is he's actually done.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  8. Re:The gear makes better photographs.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Way to miss the point.
    With a stationary slit-scan camera he's imaging t*Y, not X*Y.