
Digital picture converted to string art patterns - gus_massa
http://artof01.com/vrellis/works/knit.html
======
wodenokoto
Probably more interesting to HN readers is this blog post describing an
algorithm for doing this:

[http://www.thevelop.nl/blog/2016-12-25/ThreadTone/](http://www.thevelop.nl/blog/2016-12-25/ThreadTone/)

~~~
Nition
This is super cool.

I wonder if you could convert it to colour as well, if you changed the rule
from a single thread for the whole thing to three threads for the whole thing
(CMY). Might be quite an interesting effect since you'd need to sort of
"smudge" colours across the image the same way you're essentially smudging the
blacks.

Edit: Wait a minute, actually it wouldn't work because you can't combine
colours. Put magenta thread on top of cyan and you'd get... magenta.

~~~
allenz
You might be able to run the algorithm once on each color component.

------
egwynn
Super cool! But that's not knitting, and the circle isn't what most would
consider to be a loom, either.

EDIT: Ok, it's a knitting loom (not a weaving loom), but the artist still
isn't "knitting" using it.

------
wiredfool
I'd guess that the calculations are essentially a reverse radon
transformation. Each string should be analogous to the sensor reading for a
cat scan of a density field matching the portrait.

~~~
Asooka
I didn't see it mentioned, but I assume you have to do it with a single
unbroken string, so it's a bit more involved maybe. I'd imagine you'd first
generate all the lines that best approximate the image, then insert additional
lines to turn it into one unbroken string where they're least disruptive.

------
wyldfire
Kinda like the radon transform [1] used in tomography.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon_transform](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon_transform)

------
bajsejohannes
> Over 2 billion calculations are needed to produce each pattern; not much of
> a load for today’s computers, but definitely an impossible task for the
> human brain. So, this is a new and unique type of knitting that could not
> have been implemented a few decades ago, without computers.

It's hard to take this assertion at face value. Compare that to what a human
go player can do vs. a computer. (2 billion computations would be on the order
of seconds on a normal computer)

Still a cool project!

------
amelius
Very similar to this: [https://rogerjohansson.blog/2008/12/07/genetic-
programming-e...](https://rogerjohansson.blog/2008/12/07/genetic-programming-
evolution-of-mona-lisa/)

------
ChristianGeek
Reminds me of this (automated nail/string art based on photos):

[http://www.laarco.com/](http://www.laarco.com/)

------
kevinwang
That example timelapse is really cool! Great idea.

------
TomGullen
Is the program to dictate how to thread these available anywhere? I'd like to
try doing my own!

------
callesgg
How come vimeo became the site for artsy videos?

~~~
jcl
I expect it was due getting early traction with indie filmmakers, particularly
through its early support for high-definition videos.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeo)

------
rhizome
I wouldn't comment except that the OP's comment history here is also highly
critical, so: they already posted this like 8 months ago. It's also not
knitting as most people understand the term. I mean, it's kinda neat, but the
title here is misleading, and it's the second time they've used it.
Promotional?

~~~
dang
By no means! We invited gus_massa to repost it. This is part of our ongoing
experiments in recovering good stories that fell through the cracks the first
time round—described at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380)
and many other posts linked from there.

Also, it's fine to repost a story if it's good for HN and hasn't had attention
yet. Otherwise too many great submissions would languish unseen. This is
important enough to be in HN's FAQ:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html).

~~~
rhizome
I see. I think an indicator like "[repost]" might cut down on the number of
times you'd have to explain it. :)

And it's still a bad title given the content.

~~~
noir_lord
Putting [repost] would probably have an impact on the vote ratio up and down
given that in many online communities 'repost' is seen as a negative thing
perhaps.

~~~
a_e_k
Maybe [invited repost]?

