Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Toys

Hektor: the Graffiti Robot 222

Lopex writes "Gizmodo has a story about Hektor, a graffiti robot. Apparently it is for the extremely geeky (or perhaps extremely lazy) tagger. Hektor.ch has photos, information (pdf), and a movie (15 Mb) of it in action."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hektor: the Graffiti Robot

Comments Filter:
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:19PM (#8125612) Homepage Journal
    Simple, elegant and with the right planning and execution some pretty decent murals could be done. I think there's a real market for it, even for commercial advertising. Give something like this more colors and even graphitti artists will begin to wonder why they put up with the freezing cold, cops, etc. when they could just hook up one of these and lurk in the shadows until it's done. No more lugging around twenty cans of spraypaint.
  • by danaan ( 728990 ) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:22PM (#8125653)
    This just makes me wonder why similar technology hasn't been used for the giant advertisements that cover the entire side of buildings. From what I've seen, these are all done by living human artists, who do a remarkable job in most cases. But it would seem very realistic, and I'd think cheaper to use some kind of robotic painter that could replicate art on anything. Have I just missed the news, or is it Clear Channel holding back the progress of technology?
  • Taggers SUCK (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:31PM (#8125753)
    Taggers SUCK.

    It's ugly, it's destructive, and it sure ain't art.

    You might as well just smear a public place with your own feces. Same effect.
  • Re:Art? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:42PM (#8125903)
    wow, you're a dumbass

    way to generalize, stereotype and hate what you don't understand

    plenty of taggers are both better technical artists than you will ever even dream of being, and also have nothing to do with gangs at all

    for such an 'educated' site, /. has some of the most blatant reactionary tunnel vision to be found on the planet

  • Re:Art? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mateito ( 746185 ) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:44PM (#8125937) Homepage
    > Where's the art?

    In response to another followup - Art (like beauty) is in the eye of the beholder.

    There are peeps who say that all graffiti is vandalism, and others that all graffiti is art.

    Like any good fence sitter: I've seen some amazing renditions done with spray cans over "public" walls. These to me are art. Amazing use of colour, form. Many with a social message.

    "Tagging", which if interpret it correctly, means basically signing your name on every exposed surface you can find, to me is vandalism. I've seen "taggers" scrawl stupid looking black squiggles that even a demented three year-old wouldn't bother producing scrawled on such creative places such as the sides of trains, bus-shelters and toilet doors.

    My pet hate is when they paint right over the top of more elaborate and creative works. Its almost as if "I couldn't do something like that, so I'm going to fuck it up".

    There is middle ground, but most graffiti I've seen falls into one of these two camps.
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:53PM (#8126049) Homepage Journal
    Right, now they just have to lug around twenty cans of spraypaint, one hundred feet of rope, a level, a ladder, something to attach the rope to the side of the building with, a laptop, data cable, and a robot.

    While you were typing this cynical view, I was considering what I'd have to do to pull off something. What modifications/enhancements I'd need to go 4 color, how to get away from paint cans. A bit of engineering and a decent exercise, but I think it could be done. Honestly, it's already been done, but not portably, afaik, for a small unit. I'm just curious how much propellant would be needed to spray like an airbrush. If CO2 could be used, how much would be needed, how to keep it from freezing up, etc.

    More practical applications keep occuring to me as I think about it. Why not make these or lease them out to do painting in difficult or hazardous locations (i.e. underside of bridges.) Looking for a new way to make a living? Seems like opportunity for some bright minds to pool and do this commercially.

    After the last time I put up with the aggrevation of using a Wagner Powerpainter to stain the side of a house, this seems like a dream come true. Just screw in a couple hooks and set something like this up to do most of the work.

  • Re:Art? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Rude Turnip ( 49495 ) <valuation.gmail@com> on Thursday January 29, 2004 @02:58PM (#8126108)
    I've seen lots of graffiti...some of it looks really good, some of it is just there for vandalism purposes. The former I'd call art, regardless of the surface it's on.

    But hey...art or not, IT'S NOT YOUR FSCKING WALL!!! Buy a goddamn canvas or get someone's permission before you paint their building. This is a simple case of "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."

  • Re:Art? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HoldenCaulfield ( 25660 ) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @03:07PM (#8126215) Journal
    I haven't read their 37 page PDF about how the robot works, but I did watch the video. If your argument is that the art is in the challenge, then I think the challenge aspect here is huge. Having time to mount the two stepper motors, calibrate the cable lengths (though this may be automated - the can was pulled to either side at the beginning of the video, maybe letting the robot figure out the length of the cables?), and have enough time for the robot to do it's thing seems rather challenging to me.

    Not to mention before hand they'd have to get the image into a format they can use (again, I didn't read if the creaters have a program that can take any vector based graphic or what). Add in that to get beyond black and white (not even grey tones as the robot doesn't feather the paint or anything), you'd have to overlay multiple layers of color, the challenge goes up, and if you had to create a separate image for each layer and figure out how they'd overlay/interact, then I'd say the challenges are quite significant indeed.

    Granted, most of this art is going to be more like logos since you can't do shading to achieve the familiar bubble letters you see, but I'd say it's still art . . .
  • Re:Art? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by s0l0m0n ( 224000 ) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @03:08PM (#8126230) Homepage
    So some one like Michelangelo who paints on a building with permission is an artist, but some one who paints on a building without is merely defacing a building?

    That's an awfully black and white view of the world.

    I suppose that all of those cave paintings were some punk kid throwing up gang signs for the bison gang.

    You wanna roll with the bison, fool?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29, 2004 @03:52PM (#8126775)
    Wow. Amazing comeback there child.

    Why am I not suprised that the best you can do is make a masterbation reference?

    Probably because you operate at the mental level of a primate anyway - so all you can can handle is shit-slinging and self-manipulation. As evidenced by your chosen "hobby" which amounts to public self-gratification anyway.

    Guess what? We don't want to see you playing with your pathetically tiny penis. Have the good sense to do that in private instead.

  • Re:I saw this (Score:1, Insightful)

    by 88NoSoup4U88 ( 721233 ) on Thursday January 29, 2004 @05:35PM (#8127984)
    To be honest, it looked like peanuts to me too.

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Working...