Slashdot Mirror


Previously Unknown Warhol Works Recovered From '80s Amiga Disks

First time accepted submitter mooterSkooter (1132489) writes "Magnetic Imaging tools were used to recover a dozen images produced by Andy Warhol on his Amiga computer. I would've just stuck the disks in and tried to copy it myself." Read more about it from the Frank Ratchye Studio for Creative Inquiry, which says "The impetus for the investigation came when [artist Cory] Arcangel, a self-described “Warhol fanatic and lifelong computer nerd,” learned about Warhol’s Amiga experiments from the YouTube video of the 1985 Commodore Amiga product launch. Acting on a hunch, and with the support of CMOA curator Tina Kukielski, Arcangel approached the AWM in December 2011 regarding the possibility of restoring the Amiga hardware in the museum’s possession, and cataloging any files on its associated diskettes. In April 2012, he contacted Golan Levin, a CMU art professor and director of the FRSCI, a laboratory that supports “atypical, anti-disciplinary and inter-institutional” arts research. Offering a grant to support the investigation, Levin connected Cory with the CMU Computer Club, a student organization that had gained renown for its expertise in “retrocomputing,” or the restoration of vintage computers."

171 comments

  1. 1985 by rossdee · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    from the YouTube video of the 1985 Commodore Amiga product launch

    I didn't know YouTube was around in 1985

    I bought my first Amiga in 1986

    1. Re:1985 by Galaga88 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They introduced a new feature in 2015 that allows broadcasts to be sent back in time.

      However, due to a lightning strike, it got stuck on 1885 after sending only a few videos back to 1955.

    2. Re:1985 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      from the YouTube video of the 1985 Commodore Amiga product launch

      I didn't know YouTube was around in 1985

      It wasn't. That is why it says "from the YouTube video of the 1985 Commodore Amiga product launch" and not "from the 1985 YouTube video of the Commodore Amiga product launch"

    3. Re:1985 by cyborg_monkey · · Score: 0, Informative

      Give 'em a break, in a rush for first post that is all he could come up with.

    4. Re:1985 by Richy_T · · Score: 4, Funny

      That long ago? It was probably called YeTube.

    5. Re:1985 by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I was reading about the new Google Time Machine... I thought that was for Street View and not Youtube.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    6. Re:1985 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That long ago? It was probably called YeTube.

      YeTube only covers about 20% of the videos cowboys want to see. The other 80% is on YeBoob.

  2. Amiga Floppies by tekrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They could have just used the disk drive. 99% of my Amiga floppies still work just fine.

    The Amiga 1000 was a surprisingly durable machine, and frankly, Commodore, despite anything you could say about them making "toy" computers at a target price used very high quality components.

    A modern PC's power supply will burn out long before a 25-yr old Commodore power supply will.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Amiga Floppies by Kl00dge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You apparently never had to put your C64 power supply in the refrigerator.

    2. Re:Amiga Floppies by mooterSkooter · · Score: 2

      Exactly what I thought. I would have just tried the disk in an Amiga with a HD attached, made an image and copied that over to try out in an emulator. Magnetic Imaging devices indeed! Well, makes for a more interesting story I suppose.

    3. Re:Amiga Floppies by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      You apparently never had to put your C64 power supply in the refrigerator.

      I've heard of drilling through the potting material to remove and replace a fuse buried in there, but never that. What was the hope behind the refrigeration of the "brick"?

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    4. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      False, and false. I have toasted many an Amiga power supply, and a number of Amiga chips. Also, old double density floppies while being surprisingly robust aren't anywhere near 100% reliable at nearly 30 years. I have had a number of mine shed the oxide layer, fouling the heads on the drive in the process and require a clean before they would work again, and I imagine that the museum probably wanted a little more guarantee that they could safely recover the data since it's not just some video game image they were trying to make an ADF of.

    5. Re:Amiga Floppies by bws111 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hope your not an archeologist or forensics expert. The first thing to be concerned about, when dealing with a one-of-a-kind artifact, is to minimize any POSSIBLE (not probable) damage. There is a non-zero probability that using a disk drive could cause damage. There is less of a possibility that magnetic imaging would cause damage.

    6. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was talking about the Amiga. The original Amiga 1000 was *not* a cheap computer- the RRP was $1300 (in 1987 dollars) at launch, and that was *without* an RGB monitor or hard drive.

      It wasn't until the Amiga 500 that it became affordable and successful (well, in Europe anyway), and even that was way more expensive than the C64 at launch.

    7. Re:Amiga Floppies by Kl00dge · · Score: 1

      It was farily common, at least among people I knew, for the power supplies to overheat. I believe it was the early units. It would just shut down and we'd stick them in the refrigerator or freezer for a few minutes so we could get another 45 minutes or so out of them.

    8. Re:Amiga Floppies by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      ALL computers in the 80s were built like that. To this day, I still have an IBM keyboard from the early 80s that I'm pretty sure I could hammer nails with.

    9. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on which C64 power supply you had. There were two different versions, one had a higher output than the other. The higher output versions were highly prized by BBS operators.

      Running my BBS on a Buscard II to my dual 8250 floppy drives and an RS-232 interface to an external Hayes modem, I had to use one of the high-powered power supplies, as well as add an additional heat sink added to the voltage regulator on the C64's circuit board to keep it from overheating.

    10. Re:Amiga Floppies by qwijibo · · Score: 1

      Of course you could still hammer nails with it, but can you plug it in and *type* on it?

      I used to know people who would carefully disassemble their old IBM keyboards, run the parts through a dishwasher and reassemble them, fully functional.

      These days, I'm not sure if some keyboards could stand up to the compressed air in a can cleaning.

    11. Re:Amiga Floppies by jrumney · · Score: 1

      False, and false. I have toasted many an Amiga power supply, and a number of Amiga chips.

      Ditto, by playing around with the parallel port. There were no buffer ICs on the old Amigas to stop bad things happening to the main processor or coprocessors when there were shorts on the external I/O pins.

    12. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on which C64 power supply you had. There were two different versions, one had a higher output than the other. The higher output versions were highly prized by BBS operators.

      Running my BBS on a Buscard II to my dual 8250 floppy drives and an RS-232 interface to an external Hayes modem, I had to use one of the high-powered power supplies, as well as add an additional heat sink added to the voltage regulator on the C64's circuit board to keep it from overheating.

      Memories of the good old days of personal computing when computers were unique and fun.

    13. Re:Amiga Floppies by timeOday · · Score: 2

      My (parents') Amiga 500 died half a dozen times from electrostatic discharge. Ultimately we made a mat to sit it on, out of cardboard wrapped in foil and wired to the wall outlet ground. You would spark yourself on the mat before using the computer.

    14. Re:Amiga Floppies by Misagon · · Score: 1

      99% of the Amiga floppies I still have work fine, but back in the day, I had to throw away 99% of my floppies quite early because of read/write errors.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    15. Re:Amiga Floppies by JMZero · · Score: 1

      We just put a fan on ours, and it stayed up. But yeah, the power supply was the only thing Commodore hardware I ever heard of problems with.

      --
      Let's not stir that bag of worms...
    16. Re:Amiga Floppies by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      A modern PC's power supply will burn out long before a 25-yr old Commodore power supply will.

      Nonsense. Back in the early 90's I sold consumer electronics for a living, and we did a brisk business in aftermarket and grey market power supplies for various Commodore machines - because the stock power supplies burned out with depressing regularity and stock replacements were expensive and difficult-to-impossible to obtain from official sources.

    17. Re:Amiga Floppies by Sipper · · Score: 2

      I've heard of drilling through the potting material to remove and replace a fuse buried in there, but never that. What was the hope behind the refrigeration of the "brick"?

      Yes, the C64 power supply was potted -- and after digging through it what had to be replaced wasn't a fuse, it was a 5v linear regulator. The problem with the C64 power supply was that the Linear regulator was designed for 1A, but Commodore was using it to pass 1.2A. This shortened the life of the part, and when it failed it required a huge effort to dig through it to find the part that was bad and replace it.

      But I did exactly that. And unfortunately one generally had to do that if they wanted to end up with a reliable supply, because the replacement supplies had the same design flaw and would thus fail in the same way. Once I replaced the 5v regulator with one that was rated for 1.5A, it never failed again. :-)

    18. Re:Amiga Floppies by Sipper · · Score: 2

      You apparently never had to put your C64 power supply in the refrigerator.

      The C64 power supply used a 5v linear regulator rated for 0.2A - 0.3A less current than the C64 itself drew through it, so the part would have premature failure because it was underrated. Apparently/supposedly the difference was expected to be dumped as heat, and the supply was potted which made it very difficult to get to the part that failed and replace it... but doing so was necessary because the replacement supplies had the same design flaw. I did that replacement and after doing so the power supply looked terrible (I left it ripped open), but with a linear regulator that had a sufficient current rating it never failed again (whereas the replacement supplies all did).

      Putting the power supply in a refrigerator sounds terrible (but dedicated), but then, so was the "correct" fix. ;-)

    19. Re:Amiga Floppies by Retron · · Score: 1

      22 years ago I was given my first PC - one which my dad's works had thrown out. An original IBM PC, complete with dual floppies and a mono screen (and cassette port around the back). Sadly it was thrown out a couple of years later when we upgraded to a 486, but I kept the keyboard... an IBM Model F which is built like a tank. It can still, in theory, be used with a modern PC if you use a signal converter... which costs a small fortune. Not that I'd want to, though, as the keys are in odd positions (eg control is where caps lock now is).

      I'm typing this on an early 90s Model M keyboard which I bought from eBay many years ago. It connects via a PS/2 port and seems indestructible, albeit not quite as nice to type on as that Model F was. It's quieter than the F though, which is handy. The Model M was available back in 1984... hmm, 30 years ago this year!

      Side note: due to spending far too much time on that PC as a 12-year-old, I ended up using the numeric keypad for cursor control. It's a hard habit to kick, as I do the same over 20 years later - I very seldom have numlock on, instead using the numbers above the letters for numeric data entry.

    20. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is bullshit nostalgia. For just a singular example, the ZX Spectrum+ from 1984 was reported by many retailers to have up to a 30% failure rate.

    21. Re:Amiga Floppies by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Of course you could still hammer nails with it, but can you plug it in and *type* on it?

      If it's one of the classic Model "M"s, you could type by hammering nails with it, if you're skilled enough to strike the nailhead with the specific keys you want.

      Nowadays. Feh. I have given up on decent keyboards. I will settle for less violently sucky ones. And have to look pretty far afield to fine one.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    22. Re:Amiga Floppies by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Proof-positive that Darwin was right. Natural selection yielded a subset of the species with strong survival characteristics, while winnowing out the weak.

      Yeah, even today, I'm terribly surprised and disappointed if any of my Amiga floppies fail while I'm reading them. I suppose I should hurry up and copy them onto a hard drive as image files before something I care about dies.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    23. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.pckeyboard.com/ - Here you go. classic Model M style bucklig spring keyboar

    24. Re:Amiga Floppies by amigabill · · Score: 1

      I'm curious about how they do magnetic imaging without running it across a floppy drive head. Is there yet any detailed infomration about how they accomplished their magnetic images? Or in general how it's done, whether or not if that was their process?

    25. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for that wonderful mental image - I needed a good grin and there it was ^^

    26. Re:Amiga Floppies by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      By the Amiga 500 they'd improved. All I had to do was put a rubber hot water bottle (filled with cold water) on the power supply to act as a heat sink.

    27. Re:Amiga Floppies by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Two problems, first they didn't want to damage the disks, and second the .pic format is pretty rare (and not well supported even in early Amiga days).

    28. Re:Amiga Floppies by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Those are rare though and hard to find, probably full of dust, and not the sort of thing you want to stick a valuable floppy disk in. (those artists who examine Warhol's work are very careful and treat it all like something amazingly precious, even his old underwear, which I am not making up)

    29. Re:Amiga Floppies by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Control is SUPPOSED to be where the capslock is now, it was the universal standard! The idiot that changed the position is still in hiding in the witness protection program!

    30. Re:Amiga Floppies by amigabill · · Score: 2

      Also, if they did much research, they might have found that one of the few remaining Amiga hardware peripheral producers has for some time sold floppy disk controllers that I understand are popular with Forensics people, as they can read a very wide variety of formats on a standard PC.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
      http://wiki.icomp.de/wiki/Catw...

    31. Re:Amiga Floppies by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Certainly you're not talking about the C=64 power supplies that were notorious for burning out after only about a year of moderate use?

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    32. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they used this to image it then ran it in e-uae http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KryoFlux

    33. Re:Amiga Floppies by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Floppy reading is a destructive process. In a healthy disk, the disk will not be damaged by it. But you could have a disk with the information on it, but not durable enough to be read with a standard disk drive.

    34. Re:Amiga Floppies by sjames · · Score: 1

      Same here. A bigger regulator with a proper heat sink solved the problem for good. It didn't help that the original heatsink was embedded in the epoxy.

    35. Re:Amiga Floppies by sjames · · Score: 1

      If the data is irreplaceable and potentially valuable, magnetic imaging is safer than running the disk through an old drive. So, retrieve MY doodles using an old drive, use imaging for Warhol's.

    36. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The PSU was the only thing I ever had to replace on the c64! Mine started melting.

    37. Re:Amiga Floppies by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      True, but people will pay stupid massive amounts of money for his stuff. So in the sheer spirit of commercialism it's prudent, and profitable to humor the Warhol fans, to reap the highest profit from them. Andy certainly did this and we should too, in memory of him.

    38. Re:Amiga Floppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ".pic" format is probably just the "standard" iff/lbm format. Renaming to ".pic" was common in those days when not wanting everybody to read the files.

  3. Plastic "art" by hessian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Amiga and its demo scene were more art than Warhol ever will be.

    His commentary on crass commercialism basically became crass commercialism itself. Why shouldn't it? It was the same basic idea.

    As a wise man once said, "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

    1. Re:Plastic "art" by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From looking at the "art" it looks to have little artistic value. Warhol didn't have any particular skills in computer art, and the software was quite limited in what you could do at that time. It's nothing that anybody else messing around with the same program couldn't have produced. Just because Warhol is a notable artist, does not mean that every piece of art he produced is worthy of our attention. Some people are great authors, but that doesn't mean their shopping lists or twitter posts, are literary works to be cherished.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Plastic "art" by GarethIwanFairclough · · Score: 1

      . And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

      *suppresses urge to make "In Soviet Russia" joke*.

    3. Re:Plastic "art" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You could remove the word 'computer' form that post and it would be just as true.

      But a Warhol is valuable, Art is in the eye of the beholder. Some people apparently think giant soup cans are works of genius. No accounting for taste.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pretty much.

      There is a reason Warhol decided not to release those images. Saying that this is something other than just a bit of fooling around to learn the tool is an insult.

      While not the same situation this reminds me of people trying to analyze literature. If the writer would have intended for you to interpret the text differently he would have rephrased it. To say that the text needs interpretation is equivalent to claiming that the writer was too incompetent to get his message across.

    5. Re:Plastic "art" by 0xdeaddead · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points.. but you are dead on, the demo scene was where talent lied, and just look at these 'wharholian' pieces. a copy/pasted eye, the campbell soup can (one hit wonder) done by a drunken 3yr old, and some pasted video capture of him reading the instructions. yawn.

    6. Re:Plastic "art" by jrumney · · Score: 2

      From looking at the "art" it looks to have little artistic value. Warhol didn't have any particular skills in computer art, and the software was quite limited in what you could do at that time.

      I think you'd appreciate them a little more if you were old enough to remember just how limited the graphics software of the time was.

    7. Re:Plastic "art" by Zanadou · · Score: 1

      His commentary on crass commercialism basically became crass commercialism itself. Why shouldn't it? It was the same basic idea.

      Whooooooooooooooosh.

    8. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      The Amiga and its demo scene were more art than Warhol ever will be.

      So, you hold a PhD in art history? Or have you ever taken a single entry level art history class?

      The first question was sarcasm. I did, in fact, take an art history class in college. Your uneducated opinion of art is as bad as an art historian's knowledge of quantum physics, which is somewhere between "very little" and "absolutely none".

      A man once said "Be silent and thought a fool. Speak and remove all doubt."

    9. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 0

      Art is in the eye of the beholder.

      False. It's hilarious reading all these comments from people who think they know about something they are completely ignorant about.

    10. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      ...the campbell soup can (one hit wonder)...

      My God, so much outspoken ignorance from people who can't even be bothered to look at a wikipedia article.

    11. Re:Plastic "art" by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The plate of discarded BBQ chicken parts I ate last night has more art in it that Warhol. Guy was an awful gimmick who somehow got himself to be taken seriously. I like art even some of the modern genres and I did check out his museum in Pittsburgh. Literally, there's a canvas where he pissed on wet paint. There's also a huge room of polaroids/photos of gay guys having sex. That's it, no composition no framing no nothing. I try to give every artist a chance, but how he got his name associated with great artists and American culture is incomprehensible.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    12. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I did, in fact, take an art history class in college

      This explains many, many, things.

      Still I'm glad we have highly educated "experts" on subjective matters such as art so we can all be told what is and isn't art. Where would we all be without people like you, eh?

    13. Re:Plastic "art" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Warhol's 'art' isn't old enough to have passed the test of time.

      Art history records many examples of things that were art at the time but are now recognized as junk. Art history is not the same subject as art. It actually includes looking at trends that are stupid in hindsight. Like pop art and photo real paintings.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    14. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Art is in the eye of the beholder.

      False. It's hilarious reading all these comments from people who think they know about something they are completely ignorant about.

      "about which they are completely ignorant".

    15. Re:Plastic "art" by Sentrion · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how many scholars and academics earn their living writing literature and creating works of art for the sole purpose of having other scholars and academics review, critique, and interpret their work, all while getting paid to sell textbooks that they write, and paid to tell students how important those works are to read and study?

      By pointing out the lunacy of this system you are endangering an entire sub-culture and way of life. They could have you burned at the stake as a heretic.

    16. Re:Plastic "art" by Desler · · Score: 1

      How is it false? From what objective source is "art" defined?

    17. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The rule about not ending a sentence with a preposition is one of those nonsense rules made up whole cloth in the 19th century. Now who's the moron?

    18. Re:Plastic "art" by 517714 · · Score: 1

      A boy once said, "The emperor has no clothes!" We see you chose to remove any doubt, with your appeal to authority and putting knowledge and opinion on the same level. You overvalue opinion - your own, and that of professionals in an almost purely subjective realm.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    19. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think Warhol's work was crap on the Amiga, I can tell you plenty of "scene" artists have made crap on the Amiga too. There are demos with really great art, and demos with really shitty art. It's not all gold.

      We even went through a period where many demos had to prominently feature marijuana and use "tagger" style graffiti writing, and that spread to the PC scene too. That "elevated" the demo scene to the same level that your average idiotic American gangbanger thug has.

      In short, take off your rose-tinted glasses and go fuck yourself.

    20. Re:Plastic "art" by TangoMargarine · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your uneducated opinion of art is as bad as an art historian's knowledge of quantum physics, which is somewhere between "very little" and "absolutely none".

      Except for the tiny fact that art is wholly subjective and quantum physics is wholly objective, sure.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    21. Re:Plastic "art" by 517714 · · Score: 2

      Warhol was mostly marketing, like Kim Kardashian with a paint brush.

      But you challenged us to read, so from Wikipedia:

      "New York's Museum of Modern Art hosted a Symposium on pop art in December 1962 during which artists like Warhol were attacked for "capitulating" to consumerism. Critics were scandalized by Warhol's open embrace of market culture."

      "In 1979, reviewers disliked his exhibits of portraits of 1970s personalities and celebrities, calling them superficial, facile and commercial, with no depth or indication of the significance of the subjects. They also criticized his 1980 exhibit of 10 portraits at the Jewish Museum in New York, entitled Jewish Geniuses, which Warhol-who was uninterested in Judaism and Jews-had described in his diary as "They're going to sell."

      "The Philosophy of Andy Warhol (1975), 'Making money is art, and working is art and good business is the best art.' "

      I believer it is the opinions of those critics and reviewers which have stood the test of time, not Warhol's artistic works.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    22. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the writer would have intended for you to interpret the text differently he would have rephrased it. To say that the text needs interpretation is equivalent to claiming that the writer was too incompetent to get his message across.

      Except when the author says they are leaving something open for interpretation or want something to be ambiguous. Although usually it is kind of silly to push an interpretation that the author has explicitly denied... except in some of the cases where it looks like the author was influenced by something they don't want to admit to others or themselves was an influence (e.g. denying that being in a war had any effect on their work).

    23. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did, in fact, take an art history class in college.

      An art history class, as in you took a single course in college? And the entitles you to belittle and attack people here with a bunch of posts that have almost no content other than telling people they are idiots and should learn more? If you were so knowledgeable, how about maybe a sentence or two explaining what people got wrong, instead of a trite quote that doesn't add anything?

      Having taken several courses on art history and contemporary art while in college, I still get called out on things I missed by my wife who has a graduate degree in the field. And yet, you feel privileged to call out people saying things that both contemporary and current art critics have said about Warhol, who have much more education and awareness of art than any of us here. You can't just come into an random internet argument about "what is art" and simply say "You're wrong, learn about art," when many people in art had and still have such arguments too.

    24. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think you described a large part of academia:

      Do you have any idea how many scholars and academics earn their living writing papers for the sole purpose of having other scholars and academics review, critique, and interpret their work, all while getting paid to sell textbooks that they write, and paid to tell students how important those works are to read and study?

      Deciding which subjects are actually important to study might require a bit more subtlety, especially if you want to use a metric other than, "gets me the highest pay job."

    25. Re:Plastic "art" by pyster · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure the history books dont include the demo scene. Why dont you let your fingers do the googling and educate yourself on the demo c64 and amiga demo scene. i recognize Warhol as an important artist, but when it came the amiga the stunning works of art that inspired a wide range of emotion were from the scene.

      I'm gonna guess that they dont actually teach anything about scene art in art history class, yet was important to an millions.

      "The Amiga and its demo scene were more art than Warhol ever will be." The guy is talking about art, and the quality there of. Certainly subjective, but I've not known any warhol pieces to make person cry at their viewing.

    26. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if it comes from the "right" person, anything is made "art".

    27. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Critics that were contemporaries with the likes of Manet, Van Gogh, and Gaugan were similarly shunned by the establishment. Meanwhile, paintings that hung in galleries and were critically praised at the time are worthless today.

      If it evokes an emotional reaction, even if that reaction is contempt, it's art. The worst insult you can hurl at a painter is "gee, that's pretty."

    28. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Art is man-made and its scholars fully understand it. That's not the case with quantum physics, yet at least.

    29. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      In a subject that is not my field, I have little choice but to listen to those who have studied in the field.

    30. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You can start with the dictionary.

    31. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Art history records many examples of things that were art at the time but are now recognized as junk.

      Entirely true. Van Gogh was a failure who couldn't sell paintings. Gaugan and Manet were panned by contemporary critics, while the works that were critically praised and hung in expensive galleries are worthless today.

      Warhol has been dead for a quarter of a century. Maybe enough time has passed, maybe not. But these guys who have never had an art history class who think they know what art is are ludicrous.

      It actually includes looking at trends that are stupid in hindsight. Like pop art and photo real paintings.

      Have you ever seen an Audrey Flack painting in a museum? Photorealistic still lifes that will take your breath away.

    32. Re:Plastic "art" by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Are we talking about "fully understanding" the *history* of the piece of art, or the artwork itself? Because I can know who painted something, what materials they used, where and when they painted it, but still know nothing about the meaning of the art.

      Plus, if you just *ask* the creator what his art means, maybe they'll tell you. In which case, how can we really be said to be "studying" anything? If we had an oracle that just told us how quantum physics works, we wouldn't really need to study that either.

      But maybe it's just because I don't understand the idea of e.g. close reading, as an engineerish person. If we have to ask the artist what their art means, that seems to kind of defeat the whole point. And you'll get teachers who interpret books to mean things that the author never meant, based on the prevailing social trends of the time.

      A truly attentive close reading of a two-hundred-word poem might be thousands of words long without exhausting the possibilities for observation and insight. To take an even more extreme example, Jacques Derrida's essay Ulysses Gramophone, which J. Hillis Miller describes as a "hyperbolic, extravagant... explosion" of the technique of close reading, devotes more than eighty pages to an interpretation of the word "yes" in James Joyce's modernist novel Ulysses.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    33. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having worked in a public art gallery fielding questions from the public, that is one of the naivest things I've heard, especially if you are trying to suggest you've studied art at all yourself. Entire movements (and as a result, entire courses at universities) revolve around trying to define art. Trying to suggest the dictionary definition is relevant is like trying to teach someone computer science by telling them to read a generic dictionary.

    34. Re:Plastic "art" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Form follows function.

    35. Re:Plastic "art" by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Are we talking about "fully understanding" the *history* of the piece of art, or the artwork itself?

      The artwork itself. The composition, use of color, symbolism, etc. The history only points to where a work stands in relation to works before, contemporary, and afterword.

      It was an interesting class. Not very useful, but interesting.

  4. Editorializing by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would've just stuck the disks in and tried to copy it myself.

    Possibly that's because you're an idiot. Floppies and drives degrade just like everything else and taking these extraordinary measures gives a better chance of not permanently damaging something priceless during recovery attempts.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
    1. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, you met the Amiga's DiskDoctor too, I see :)

    2. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say you're the same kind of over-engineering idiot these guys were. We get it, being careful is good, but let's not be extreme about things. I have hundreds of 25 years old 3.5" (and 5.25") floppies that still read (and write) just as good today as they did 25 years ago. The 3.5" floppy drive mechanism is in its nature not able to ruin a floppy disk unless you purposely ruin the drive head; "degrading" isn't a problem with these drives.

    3. Re:Editorializing by mooterSkooter · · Score: 1

      That is a very real possibility. However, every single random miggy floppy disk I've ever tried, even after 20 years has worked perfectly.

      I do see the point though - somebody probably thought they could make some mega-bucks from the ultra-rare Worhol images.

    4. Re:Editorializing by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Heh, no. I was never a Miggie user back in the day, I've just got much experience with PC floppies and Murphy.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    5. Re:Editorializing by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Do any of your random old floppies hold the only known copies of works by a major dead artist? Wanker.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    6. Re:Editorializing by linebackn · · Score: 0

      I've recently read a number of floppies that are older than the ones in the TFA, and none of them have magically fallen apart.

      Technically reading a disk will put some wear on it because the heads touch the surface, but if the disk was properly stored and was of a good brand (not Wabash), that wear is negligible.

      Most serious software archivists would simply plop the disks in a floppy drive connected to a Kryoflux, or similar device, and be done with it.

      Magnetic imaging is an overkill unless the disk is from a system where no compatible form drive exists any more.

    7. Re:Editorializing by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Of course a 3.5" floppy drive can damage a disk. The head is in contact with moving media. Should it damage the disk? No. CAN it damage the disk? Certainly.

    8. Re:Editorializing by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but if the disk was properly stored and was of a good brand

      If.

      This is pretty typical of Slashdot, really: technical people with some education second-guessing people who do $THING for a living even though they don't have the same knowledge of the field or the circumstances, but by $DEITY they're smart people and they know things, so they're instantly armchair experts.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    9. Re:Editorializing by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Right? What happens if a neckbeard's dandruff flake gets into the drive and thence between the read head and the magnetic disc?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    10. Re:Editorializing by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Was Warhol's dirty TP also art? As much as some image he played with draw circle, flood fill on. Bonus; No 'which is the original' issues on the TP.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old DD disks were like that; still readable years later. After HD disks came along, everything changed; the magnetic flux simply wasn't as strong on the disk.

    12. Re:Editorializing by 0xdeaddead · · Score: 1

      Then you'd miss stuff like 1-2-3 diskettes and unformatted blocks. For old crap you really only get one shot at reading it, as it'll all rot away. Best to make the best possible image. And with 6TB disks shipping really what is the excuse?

    13. Re:Editorializing by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If.

      This is pretty typical of Slashdot, really: technical people with some education second-guessing people who do $THING for a living even though they don't have the same knowledge of the field or the circumstances, but by $DEITY they're smart people and they know things, so they're instantly armchair experts.

      This isn't limited to the technical community. Doctors are pretty bad about this too. Particularly in regard to the field of finance: some of them should practically hang out a "Scam Me" sign. I'm sure there are "Modern Major Generals" in almost any field who feel -- incorrectly -- their own expertise and success in one field should make equally competent in anything.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    14. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what?
      No one has missed these files for years. They didn't even know they existed.
      If they were lost literally nothing of value would have been lost.

    15. Re:Editorializing by Dahan · · Score: 1

      Most serious software archivists would simply plop the disks in a floppy drive connected to a Kryoflux, or similar device, and be done with it.

      And that's exactly what they did. They imaged the floppies with KryoFlux connected to a known-good, clean, Amiga floppy drive. TFA has a link to the technical details.

    16. Re:Editorializing by Dahan · · Score: 1

      Of course a 3.5" floppy drive can damage a disk. The head is in contact with moving media. Should it damage the disk? No. CAN it damage the disk? Certainly.

      Which is why they cleaned the floppy drive before putting the disks into it. "The primary concern was damage to the disks during the reading process. While impossible to eliminate without using extremely expensive equipment well beyond the reach of involved parties, it was believed this risk could be minimized by using a recently cleaned and tested floppy drive for copying ..." -- from the report detailing what they did.

      Not sure why there seems to be this assumption that because they made an "image" of the disks, they must not have used a regular Amiga floppy drive. These days I often make images of hard drives... I don't take the platters out in a clean room and use some special microscope to do it. I plug in the drive as normal and use software. Similarly, they imaged the floppies by using a regular Amiga floppy drive, albeit connected to a fancier floppy controller card that can even image disks that may have errors.

    17. Re:Editorializing by Chordonblue · · Score: 1

      Ever seen the metallic material completely stripped off of the plastic of the disk? I have. Some companies were better than others are producing quality disks - who knows what might have happened otherwise? Better not to take the chance of damaging something not restorable and doing it the hard way rather than the easy and quick method.

      --
      "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
    18. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that's some really strained logic there. I'm glad you aren't an archivist. I suppose you aren't the least bit interest in what we lost when the Library at Alexandra burnt.

    19. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, but you could debate this in a philosophy class when you reach college age.

    20. Re:Editorializing by linebackn · · Score: 1

      > Then you'd miss stuff like 1-2-3 diskettes and unformatted blocks.

      And that is why, like I said, you attach your floppy drive to a Kryoflux, SuperCard Pro, or Deluxe Option Board device.

    21. Re:Editorializing by linebackn · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. TFA made it sound like they did raw complex magnetic imaging similar to that Cray disk that was recovered while back.

      Compared to that, using a Kryoflux is little more than "throwing it in a floppy drive".

    22. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you actually test hundreds of old floppies periodically to see if they're still good? I'm having a really hard time believing that. But if it's true, I guess my life doesn't suck as much as I thought it did.

    23. Re:Editorializing by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      Was Warhol's dirty TP also art?

      It could be, according to this guy

    24. Re:Editorializing by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      DiskDoctor was supposed to be an fsck type of thing on the Amiga, only it was unreliable and buggy. That was one great thing about Amiga was that the community created all these great tool that were better than the official or default utilities. The OS kernel was great, but it had some not quite ready commercial programs that went with it and some last minute addons. Still, even the crappy stuff was much better than on the PC.

    25. Re:Editorializing by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You also need an Amiga floppy drive (or anything that can be directly controllable which excludes PC floppy drives).

    26. Re:Editorializing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, DiskDoctor was crap, but for the main reason that it tried to fix problems "in situ".

      Dave Haynie wrote a much better utility, DiskSalv, that would read the bad disk, try to fix it, and write the results to a new disk. If anything went wrong, or didn't work, you still had the original to try again (or use Quarterback Tools).

      A few years back, I figured I'd try to make archives of all my Ami disks. Using EasyADF and ISOmaster (?), I managed to read and archive well over 500 floppies with only ONE bad disk (a lemon-yellow KAO disk, if you must know). The disks with non-standard boot blocks couldn't be read, as EasyADF didn't like them. I'd expect that of the dozen of those (I don't play too many games, that's why I got an Amiga), maybe one or two could be bad.

      And for those poo-pooing the Amiga: I can still plug in my A4000, boot it up, load up TermiteTCP/iBrowse (or Miami/Aweb) and browse the net. Or launch Pagestream and print out a garage-door sized sign (or send the Gerber file to a typesetter to have a vinyl sign cut). I even have my copy of WordPerfect around here somewhere. Oh, and it plays great games, too!

      AmiNutter

  5. That's by Richy_T · · Score: 1

    Souper

  6. Digital Archaeology by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    Digital Archaeology, whoda thunk it?

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  7. My name is Andy Warhol by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 2

    and I just learned to use flood-fill.

  8. Editors please do your job by cdrudge · · Score: 5, Informative

    CMOA? AWM? CMU? FRSCI? Identifying what an acronym stands for is very helpful when the acronym isn't very well known. Yes I know I can read the article and try to find it out, but it's helpful for summaries too.

    In case anyone else was wondering:
    CMOA - Carnegie Museum of Art
    AWM - Andy Warhol Museum
    CMU - Carnegie Mellon University
    FRSCI - Frank-Ratchye STUDIO for Creative Inquiry

    1. Re:Editors please do your job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The summary is meant to be meaningless, that way you have to click on the article to get any meaningful information, thus generating extra ad views. The slashdot summary criteria is that the summary should give just enough of a hint at the story to get you to click the article, and not one bit more.

    2. Re:Editors please do your job by pyster · · Score: 0

      You mean initialism. An acronym must be pronounceable.

    3. Re:Editors please do your job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is murky water. Is SCSI really pronounceable? Well, it is if you try hard enough, we all do just that, don't we; "scuzzy". None of the "acronyms" above are any less "pronounceable" than SCSI; "see-moh", "awm" pronounces as-is, "see-mew", "frisky" is actually quite a good one in the mould of SCSI.

    4. Re:Editors please do your job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's STUDIO stand for?

      (It's nice to see that even non-technical people have acronyms within acronyms.)

  9. What not to do by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You've just found an undiscovered work by Andy Warhol. Do you want to:

    1. Wipe it down with Pledge(TM)?

    2. Call an appropriate professional for advice?

    Because I'm pretty sure that . . . "I would've just stuck the disks in and tried to copy it myself" . . . is the physical artifact equivalent of using some randomly chosen household cleaner. And museum curators are pretty anal about curation of their stuff.

    Also, for the love of God, do not use "DiskDoctor"!

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
    1. Re:What not to do by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Let me see... I last used a floppy a couple years ago and it was basically single-use: wrote data to it once, got it back off once, then Bad Sector City. Most of that 10-pack of floppies was the same way.

      Granted "modern" 3.5" floppies are much lower quality than what we had in the '80s but your assertion that floppies never break is stupid.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:What not to do by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2

      I had a failing drive that would eat disks.

      The thing about being anal retentive about preserving the data is that you don't want to be the jerk who ruined a priceless warhol artifact by having an incredibly unlucky day.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    3. Re:What not to do by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Do your archives contain anything of consequence? These are the only known copies of works by a major dead artist, they're worth taking extra precautions over that your old 16-color horse porn doesn't

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:What not to do by Nimey · · Score: 2

      But if it works then you've proven you're smarter than everyone else, and that's obviously more important.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    5. Re:What not to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DiskDoctor was great. Most of the time it managed to repair almost half of the files that weren't damaged!

    6. Re:What not to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've just found an undiscovered work by Andy Warhol. Do you want to:

      1. Wipe it down with Pledge(TM)?

      2. Call an appropriate professional for advice?

      Because I'm pretty sure that . . . "I would've just stuck the disks in and tried to copy it myself" . . . is the physical artifact equivalent of using some randomly chosen household cleaner. And museum curators are pretty anal about curation of their stuff.

      Also, for the love of God, do not use "DiskDoctor"!

      Soak it in Clorox.

      Seriously, losing this "art" is a loss to no one.

    7. Re:What not to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people would pay for the chance of being the jerk who ruined a priceless warhol artifact...

    8. Re:What not to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell me, when was the last time you broke a 3.5" disk when putting it inside a drive to read it? Never, is when.

      Well, there was the one time I copied a set of half dozen disks, all from the same batch used to hold some of project files, and half way through the drive started to strip the magnetic material off the disks... It worked fine on a test disk and the first half of the batch, but then physically damaged the disks.

    9. Re:What not to do by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      There's something inherently so deeply Warhol about doing just that.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    10. Re:What not to do by Alphadecay27 · · Score: 1

      I understand they wouldn't use it in this case but I always used Disksalv. Looks like it is still being maintained and is now freeware. It was one of the only tools at the time that would recover to another disk rather than beat the crap out of the damaged disk while it tried to fix it. I now use ddrescue under linux for recovery but disksalv was way ahead of its time.

    11. Re:What not to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a tool on a random disk in my collection for the C64 that always worked well, it was called Lazarus.

    12. Re:What not to do by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      DiskDoctor practices medicine from a throne of lies.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  10. Andy Warhol by tekrat · · Score: 1

    Andy used to hang around the SVA (School of Visual Arts) cafeteria trying to pick up (male) students.

    I was in the film school at the time, so I didn't give a crap about who he was. There was another guy as well back then, Larry Gartel, who also used the Amiga to create digital art. He's obviously not as well known as Warhol, but thems the breaks.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Andy Warhol by Pope · · Score: 1

      Peter Max (60's psychedelic artist) used an Amiga on Missing Persons' "Surrender Your Heart" video, which at the time I thought was pretty darn cool. Plus, you know, Dale Bozzio...

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    2. Re:Andy Warhol by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Peter Max (60's psychedelic artist) used an Amiga on Missing Persons' "Surrender Your Heart" video, which at the time I thought was pretty darn cool. Plus, you know, Dale Bozzio...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      Be seeing you...
  11. shouldve called me by beaverdownunder · · Score: 1

    i have a mint amiga 600!

    1. Re:shouldve called me by idontgno · · Score: 1

      i have a mint amiga 600!

      Poser! They never made the Amiga in any color than dead-fish beige! (Except for the CDTV and CD32, which were "A/V component charcoal".)

      Hell, does any computer come in a primary color, other than overaggressive "compensating for something" red on certain gaming-grade systems?

      And yes, I'm joking, and I know you don't mean color when you say "mint".

      I'm just trying to forestall the inevitable "whoosh" here. Even if it kills the joke.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:shouldve called me by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Mint was the flavor of the computer you berk!

  12. Reverse engineer the format??? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Informative

    Odds are very high that they where IFF. Commodore created a universal documented format container called IFF back in the day. The Graphics version was completely documented and is evens still supported by a lot of graphics programs.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Reverse engineer the format??? by RJFerret · · Score: 2

      It was said in the BBC article emulators couldn't load it, and considering GIMP loads IFF, and he had a pre-release Amiga 1000 with unreleased software, it's entirely possible it was from before the Interchange File Format was standardized.

      Sure enough, turns out to be the case, paraphrased from the PDF linked above, An older format deprecated by 1990 was called PLBM (PLanar BitMap, compared to the ILBM interleaved bitmaps you might recall as typical IFF). This format is much more poorly (sic) documented. One disk contained an EA slidshow of PLBM files. A pre-release version of Graphicraft, as well as the A-squared framegrabber both produced what they dubbed a "Graphicraft format", essentially an uncompressed PLBM without an IFF header. All the files found in that format contained at most 32 colors.

      Per those commenting on robustness, 40 disks, 4 had bad sectors, 9 had file system issues. Half of those impacted files/used space.

    2. Re:Reverse engineer the format??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Odds are very high that they where IFF. Commodore created a universal documented format container called IFF back in the day. The Graphics version was completely documented and is evens still supported by a lot of graphics programs.

      No - Warhol started doing Amiga art before IFF. The first Amiga graphics program was Graphicraft and the .ILBM IFF format hadn't been created yet. IFF was used for all subsequent Amiga art programs. Somewhere I actually have a Warhol-signed floppy from the launch with Warhol's Debbie Harry pic on it. I believe at some point I did convert the Graphicraft file to ILBM (I may have written a converter myself a long time ago). I also got to visit Warhol's studio once with another Commodore employee to fix the color printer attached to his Amiga. Back then personal color printers were very new, big and very messy to clean the jets and replace the inks. Warhol was not in the office when we fixed it.

    3. Re:Reverse engineer the format??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. They were some arcane format "nearly resembling PLBM" according to the receipt of archive here.

      According to that document, they were only loadable with a pre-release Kickstart found on one of the disks (the Amiga 1000 booted an early BIOS from ROM and then loaded the Kickstart from disk). Evidently they changed the format before the commercial release.

      Some other images in the collection were ILBM format and were directly viewable in modern software.

      IFF became the defacto Amiga image format (it originates from Electronic Arts, IIRC), but given that these images were created using a pre-production Amiga 1000, given to the club before the A1000 was FCC certified or released for sale, no such defacto precedent could have been set at the time.

      But go on armchairing. You got a +5 Informative with your rubbish mis-information.

    4. Re:Reverse engineer the format??? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "According to that document, they were only loadable with a pre-release Kickstart found on one of the disks (the Amiga 1000 booted an early BIOS from ROM and then loaded the Kickstart from disk). Evidently they changed the format before the commercial release."
      That makes no sense at all. The OS did not have a picture viewer or OS calls to load images from disk. Kickstart was basically just the ROM part of the OS. When launched AmigaOS was not stable enough to put in rom so Commodore stuck in a writeable control store. After Kickstart you had to boot the Amiga with the Amiga OS disk. In other words none of this makes any sense at all unless the disk format was different than the release version.

      I had an Amiga 1000 and used Kickstart 1.0. I bought one at launch and the IFF format was fully documented by then. IFF might have started with EA but the IFF container was expanded to work with just about all datatypes.
      Simple truth is that "reverse engineering" graphics formats from that period on the Amiga is really simple. You knew it was one of a few resolutions and one of a few depths. If it was HAM you might have had a bit of an issue but HAM based paint programs were not yet common or frankly available. Compression was rare because of the time it took to decompress files when loading them into paint programs.
       

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  13. thanks by kuzeyozel · · Score: 0

    thank you for sharing.

  14. Were? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you computer isn't still unique and fun you're doing it wrong.

    1. Re:Were? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Supportable or unique is not a false dichotomy.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  15. Subjectivity by hessian · · Score: 1

    Art is in the eye of the beholder.

    Life is subjectively perceived but must be objectively assessed.

  16. Well, there goes ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... his 6.44E9 CPU cycles of fame.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  17. Layers of irony and smartassery != Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His commentary on crass commercialism basically became crass commercialism itself. Why shouldn't it? It was the same basic idea.

    Whooooooooooooooosh.

    No, I think he maybe *does* get it. I got- without having to have it explicitly pointed out- that this a significant part of the implied justification for low-art-promoted-as-high-art.

    It's this whole would-be-ironic, self-referencing self-justification that I've always hated.

    At some point- one that was passed long ago- it clearly just becomes an exercise in self-justifying would-be-smartassery, a meaninglessly incestuous argument used to sell crass commercialism masquerading as art masquerading as crass commercialism [repeat as often as necessary] to equally odious and wealthy clients who want to feel cleverer and more insightful than they actually are. Sometimes obscenely overpriced and underproduced "art" *is* just that.

    "Aaaahhh... but that's the irony, isn't it?" I can hear some smug tosser imply. And the moneyed collectors buying Jeff Koons' latest piece of obnoxious "playful" kitsch nod smugly.

  18. Congrats by kevmatic · · Score: 1

    I've had the pleasure of working with the CMU CC for the past several years, broadcasting their Demoparty, Demosplash, on Scenesat the past several years. These guys are seriously passionate about retrocomputing and The Demoscene. They have released some neat Demos for the Apple Lisa and the Vectrex. Good to see them getting some recognition here. They're nice bunch of guys, and the Warhol museum certainly picked the right people for the job, right in Pittsburgh.

    If you're in the Retro computers and the Amiga, they showcase a TON of it at Demosplash, both by allowing you to play games on them and by showcasing Demos, so its worth a trip.

  19. ZX Spectrum+ reliability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only does my old ZX still run (had to buy a new RF mod from Radio Shack to test it BTW) but the cassette tape programs still load! (also had to buy a cheap cassette player to use them....)

  20. Re:my image is floppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they use scanning electron microscopy. it's manually a pita however tools are available to dedicated high dollar interests. from there they'ld need to find some fairly common image conversion programs from aminet or fredfish or some amiga software base to convert images into more pc-friendly formats. images woulda been bitmap and not vector so wouldn't exactly move up to png, but getting tiff raw files shouldn't be too much of a task.

  21. uh..really? by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 1

    http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media...

    That Venus is not the work of Andy Warhol if I remember correctly. (Well, he might have done the HAM-fisted cut and paste of the third eye in the middle of her forehead..)

    I remember seeing it on the cover of one of the Amiga magazines as the full reproduction. I realize that Warhol stole most of what he did from other artists, but surely this has to be a joke.

    1. Re:uh..really? by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 2

      http://amiga.filfre.net/wp-con...

      There's the original. I was wrong, it wasn't a full reproduction - but it was a Deluxe Paint marketing image for sure.

    2. Re:uh..really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks. I remember having seen it before. It didn't make sense to me.

    3. Re:uh..really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah it is even on the cover on a manual in the picture in the article.

  22. Are you sure? by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    When you only have 16 colors, everything looks like a Warhol work.

    1. Re:Are you sure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      16 colors at 640 horizontal resolution. At 320 you can use 32, 64 Half-Brite (32 colors with an additional 32 at 50% intensity), or HAM color modes.

    2. Re:Are you sure? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It was mostly meant as a joke; a poke at Warhol's style.

  23. Wow, that was a lot of trouble to go through... by aflyingcat · · Score: 2

    Seriously ? They could have just asked. They didn't have to go to all that trouble to recover the images. Not only were there backup disks made at the time, but the images were converted and stored as IFF files after the Amiga's launch. I know a few ex-Commodore people who have signed backup disks from Warhol from the training sessions for Warhol, and from the launch itself. The graphics program he used at the launch was an early beta version. It had a more than a few bugs. Area fill in particular was a problem. Before we launch , we went over with him about what not to do during the launch demo. And of course, he completely forgot during the presentation, and went right for that button. Our rows went entirely silent when he hit that button :-) It was a major relief when the program did the fill and survived. There was a plan B, fortunately, it was unnecessary.

  24. Art and programming by hessian · · Score: 1

    This is why the Amiga Demo Scene was so amazing.

    (Other brands had good demo scenes as well. The Amiga just had the best graphics capability of anything you could purchase at that time.)

    1. Re:Art and programming by jrumney · · Score: 1

      A lot of these are from later models, with 24 bit support and higher resolutions. The original Amiga supported only a 64 colour palette from a total 4096 colours, and an additional feature where you could modify the palette part way through scanning to get smooth gradients, but techniques for exploiting this would not have been refined at the time of launch of the Amiga 1000.

    2. Re:Art and programming by Nyder · · Score: 1

      A lot of these are from later models, with 24 bit support and higher resolutions. The original Amiga supported only a 64 colour palette from a total 4096 colours, and an additional feature where you could modify the palette part way through scanning to get smooth gradients, but techniques for exploiting this would not have been refined at the time of launch of the Amiga 1000.

      Demos that used the Ham modes only did it for static pictures, all the moving parts (which was usually why you watched demos, other then to listen to the music) was done in the normal Amiga modes. So that was usually 32 (OCS) colors to 256 (AGA).

      While there can be exceptions, that is generally how the Amiga Demo's are. They were also about pushing the hardware past it's limitations, so if you know of any demos that do higher then 256 colors, let me know so I can check them out.

      --
      Be seeing you...
  25. Re:my image is floppy by stderr_dk · · Score: 1

    images woulda been bitmap and not vector so wouldn't exactly move up to png

    Why not?

    The images would most likely be in IFF ILBM format. ilbmtoppm can convert those without any problems.

    If you want a png, just add a little pnmtopng and you're done.

    --
    alias sudo="echo make it yourself #" ; # https://pipedot.org/~stderr & http://soylentnews.org/~stderr