How to Recreate Joy Division Unknown Pleasures Art Png

This whole commodity reads like it'due south written by someone who has never been within a library. "it would exist nice to take an original copy of those 3 aforementioned works in front of me to run across if they list whatsoever copyright". If simply there were institutions that have copies of obscure works like "Scientific American" that immune people to peruse them for free. Here'south an animated, interactive visualization that looks like the Joy Division album cover, based on d3.js https://github.com/daliwali/unknown_pleasures

I happen to own a copy of the Cambridge Encyclopedia Of Astronomy (Doesn't everyone?). There's no attribution credit for the epitome, though many other images in the volume accept such credits. The caption does note, however, that the pulsar has a catamenia of 1.337 seconds. I believe this makes it quite leet.

I likewise had a copy. I remember when the album came out I immediately recognized the prototype, only I had no thought they had lifted information technology straight from the book itself. At present I wish I hadn't cut the motion-picture show out and taped it to the wall. :)

I wonder if the images of the magazines were copyright-protected themselves since information technology appears he didn't actually access them firsthand.

Not a joke, but my first linguistic communication isn't English language and so I'll own upwards to the poorly written office. I think I was trying to point out that information technology seems he copied the bodily photographs of the magazines from somewhere because he admits to not owning them.

That was a long blog which essentially would have been pretty mutual cognition for most Joy Division fans and/or people interested in astrophysics. And because of that I call up the author missed out on raising a bigger and more interesting discussion: (I'll quote one of the comments on his site as that phrases is things rather well) Interesting, but the commodity misses the signal in all kinds of ways. It was common knowledge (at to the lowest degree, to those familiar with Joy Division and Saville's piece of work) that the paradigm itself was appropriated from an original that was in the public domain. The interesting point hither is not copyright, just the way in which an prototype can come to correspond a concept such that it gains new meaning. When the intended audition sees this, they remember, "Joy Division", not "pulsar". Hence, when you copy the image by way of Saville, y'all are appropriating the clan that he has established. So, this isn't about stealing images, it's nigh riding on the glaze-tails of a talented designer who managed to create a stiff brand. A proper agreement of what'south going on here makes this sentiment: "If you e'er want to utilize the image for your own personal benefit, just make sure it's clear you have no connection with Joy Division, Peter Saville, etc…" pretty shiesty.

I call up that's an adjective course of shyster, someone who is unethical, especially a lawyer.

I was stumped on that term myself, but it certainly doesn't sound endearing. It felt quack to rip the terminal line from the passage though - equally if I was trying to misquote him. Then I left his comment in it's entirety.

I tin't really contribute anything to the discussion about the prototype and rights associated with it, merely since I take to say I probably never would have guessed that i of my favorite bands e'er would prove up on HN, I approximate I'1000 going to comment anyway. :) This was probably the showtime anthology that fabricated me consider album art equally real works of fine art. I withal love Joy Division'due south music today and I volition never forget this album comprehend and what I thought when I bought the anthology (I was a piddling tardily to discover Joy Division while Ian Curtis was alive, having discovered them through New Order effectually 1983 or so). Being interested in Astrophysics (as a lay person) and I believe I read that the band referred to this as "the expiry of a star" at the time. Love the imagery associated with that. Great album, great cover art, and great band, I really wish Ian Curtis could take graced us with more from his fantastic mind, I don't recollect I've ever experienced and so much fantastic imagery from any other lyricist. EDIT: Oh, I forgot, the original CD insert that had this epitome on information technology wasn't simple paper equally I call up, information technology was a sort of rough paper (don't know how else to describe information technology) with the paradigm on it and you could feel the bumps of the lines. I recall it was that, more than even the image by itself, the two together, which actually fascinated me. I wish I would have kept that edition of the CD, it was an expensive import at the time and quite original, but I went through a few CD purges back in the ninety'southward and that was a prey of one of them. :( Oh well. I really wish I would accept gotten the vinyl and kept that, but CD's were all the rage back and then.

Saville does pretty amazing stuff. The original sleeve for New Social club'due south Blueish Mon was a die-cutting sleeve that looked like a large floppy disc. It's routinely told that the sleeve cost more to produce than the entire disc was worth. Factory Records lost money on each copy sold. Saville also designed Tony Wilson's headstone, which is pretty freaking absurd (even though it took a few years to go done) http://kottke.org/x/x/tony-wilsons-headstone

I haven't seen that before so thanks for linking! I've been a huge fan of Saville's work for years at present, and a flake of a collector of his work. I take a couple of the special boxed Manufacturing plant Records tapes from the earlier Mill years, including Unknown Pleasures. I'thousand too glad to run into the tombstone is using the Factory Records typeface (at least up top). I wonder if information technology has a FAC catalog number...

Mill Records put a lot into design and the concept backside it. Durutti Column's "Return of Durutti Column" sleeve was made of sandpaper, then it could damage other records placed beside it (the idea was supposedly Tony Wilson's).

Popular Science in 1973 had an interesting article¹ on cut-edge estimator visualization, including a star-data image like in style to the Joy Division paradigm, except in perspective and with different information. The article describes new engineering science that immune "fantastic" visualization with 7 colors. The Joy Partitioning style iii-D surface plots were a pretty standard computer graphics thing in the 1970s, oft with lines in the Y management too making a grid. They had the reward of being pretty like shooting fish in a barrel to program and not requiring a lot of retentiveness - merely start cartoon lines at the front and keep rail of the highest bespeak at each X position. A function such equally a damped sinusoid makes a nice image this way. I'm impressed past the author's tenacity and research, but a library would have really helped him out. Too, I'yard puzzled why he thinks the lack of a © on the image itself matters - magazines commonly accept something like "Entire contents copyright" in the masthead. ¹ http://books.google.com/books?id=IWxyanKoRUoC&lpg=PA104&...

1 affair I can't understand from this image Apparently it was washed with some sort of oscillograph. So how come up the peaks hide the drawings behind it? Ok, thinking about this, if the cartoon is done all at the same fourth dimension, (similar a point FFT from the lx's) then the lower cartoon device hits the upper drawing device (if the bespeak is bigger) hence making both trace the same thing.

The image dates from 1971. I am going to judge it was but drawn on a plotter, using a subconscious-line removal algorithm. The same could accept been washed on a vector monitor, but it seems the image has the incorrect dimensions for that. To give y'all an idea of what was possible in 1971, the arcade machine Calculator Space was released that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Space

Actually you're both wrong. The image is from the belatedly 60s and isn't one single plotted graph only actually multiple different measurements that take and then been stacked to make comparison easier. This article does actually explicate this, just I can forgive you lot for non getting that far every bit it'south the very last item on his blog and appears simply to have been mentioned as an after thought.

Okay, and then it was probably created in 1969 or 1970 and only published in 1971. I think you lot've misunderstood what nosotros are talking about - the method by which the graphic was created. Which I assume to take been a plotter fed instructions by a programme that removed hidden lines from the graphs.

And here's the relevant commendation 80 SUCCESSIVE PERIODS of the first pulsar observed, CP1919 (Cambridge pulsar at 19 hours nineteen minutes right rising), are stacked on acme of 1 another using the average period of one.33730 seconds in this figurer-generated illustration produced at the Arecibo Radio Observatory in Puerto Rico.

So, now the writer has a rough idea about the copyright status of the paradigm. I desire to know if the record companies agree. I'd love to run across the t-shirt produced, and the reaction from the record companies.

The weblog post was written on 19th May 2011, and so I gauge that the T-Shirt was either produced already, or that the whole project has been shelved. His concluding update to his post is from December 2012, and there is no mention nigh an actual T-Shirt that was produced. I would take also like to run into the design of the T-Shirt, but I guess I never will.

I was in MOMA in Glasgow a few years ago - back when it used to have cool stuff - and there was an installation in the basement, office of which was a running turntable with the needle stuck in the locked groove at the cease. The record was - of class - Unknown Pleasures, and in a pleasing symmetry I was wearing my T-Shirt with the pulsar epitome on information technology.

Startup thought: make copyright suck less. It seems that the options for getting artistic content for your products (websites/books/games/anthology covers) these days are express. Either you go get something off istock photograph, or your rip from google images hoping that the original owner doesn't notice. Wouldn't it be dainty to have a marketplace for art? Or some sort of protocol for tracking downwardly who created what? The business model for the company would exist that of intermediary -- i find who the copyright belongs to and skim a proceed a percentage of the royalty. Better art and no fear of copyright infringement for clients + better paid artists = win win.

That pulsar has been my desktop groundwork for a few years now. Brutally honest, cathartic album and 1 of the showtime ones where I 'identified with' the music and the art.

No one on here has admission to nature.com? It seems like my university stopped paying for it, otherwise I would take checked.

I checked the nature paper - no plots! (Well, no multi-line plots in the mode of the i in question).

I once wrote a program in Basic (on my C64) which would make such a brandish (it'south straightforward). I lost that program, but recreated a lookalike in Python: -- -- --- --- ------------------ ------------- -------------------------- ------------- ------------------ ------------- ------- ---- - ------- - -------- - - ------- ----------- - -------- ----- ----- - --------- -------- - - -------- -------- ------- ----------- ------- ---------- ------- ----------- --- - -- ------- -------- - -- -- - - -- - - ---------------- -- - ------------------ --- - - --------------- - ---------------- - - ----------------- -- -------------------- ------ ------ ------------ ------ - -- ------ -------- ----- ---- ----------- ------- - -- ------- ------ - - - ------- ------- -- - -- ----------- -- - - ----------------- -- ------------------- - ----- -- -- -- -- -- ----------------------------- -- -------------- ----------- - ----------- - -- - ---------- -- -- -- -- --------------------- -------------- heuh... it looks a flake horrible in ASCII art ;-) import random import math canvh = 40 canvw = 60 tracecount = xvi canvass = [[' ' for col in xrange(canvw)] for row in xrange(canvh)] def randomtrace(): sigma = random.uniform(iv, twenty) mu = random.gauss(canvw/2, canvw/20) grand = canvw / (sigma * math.sqrt(2*math.pi)) south = -ane.0 / (2 * sigma * sigma) amp = 2.0 tr = [amp * grand * math.exp(s * (ten - mu)*(x - mu)) for 10 in xrange(canvw)] # TODO: Random permutations, or Perlin dissonance. render tr for t in range(tracecount): if t == 0 or t == tracecount - 1: continue y = t * canvh / tracecount trace = randomtrace() for x, t in enumerate(trace): t = int(t) top = y - t if acme >= 0: canvass[top][x] = '-' for i in range(t): top += i if top >= 0: canvas[top][10] = ' ' for row in sail: line = "".bring together(row) print " ", line

I made this a while back with https://github.com/aempirei/Chat-Art . ⠶⠾⣿⡿⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⠁⠀⢹⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡾⠁⠀⠀⠀⠸⣧⣠⣤⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣄⠀⢀⣠⣤⣴⠞⠁⠀⠘⠷⣦⡀⠀⠀⣩⡿⢿⣿⣓⡶⠶⠶⠶⢦⣤ ⣤⡼⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⣾⡟⠀⠀⠀⢿⡀⠀⠀⢠⡾⠛⠁⣤⣤⣄⡀⠀⠈⢻⣄⠈⠛⢷⣄⣀⢀⣠⡶⠶⢶⡝⠛⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⣼⠿⣷⣟⠉⠀⠀⠈⢻⣿⠶⣤⡤⠤⣤ ⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠏⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣷⡶⠶⢿⣄⠀⢸⡇⠀⠈⢻⣄⣀⠀⠙⢷⣄⠀⠙⠻⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠻⣾⣟⠛⠛⠛⠛⠛⠛⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⠛⠳⠶⠶⣭⣿⣦⣤⣤⣄ ⣠⣤⣤⣴⡶⠶⠛⠁⣸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣇⠀⠀⢹⣶⡟⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⡙⠷⣄⠀⠙⢷⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠳⣦⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠷⣬ ⣁⡀⣀⣀⣤⣴⠶⣾⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣄⣠⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⣿⠻⠷⠲⣦⡉⠻⠶⠶⠶⠶⣦⣤⣄⡀⢀⣠⡿⠛⠻⣿⠛⠲⠶⠛⠛⠛⠛⢶⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠉⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣰⢏⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⡏⠀⢠⡶⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣄⣀⣈⣝⣿⣷⣄⣀⣀⣀⡀⠈⢻⡿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠹⢷⡶⠶⠾⠛⢦⣤⣤⣝⣿⣛⠛⠛⠲⠶⠶⠤ ⣛⣻⣿⣯⣽⣿⠋⣼⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣇⠀⣿⠁⠈⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠁⠈⠛⠿⣯⣍⡙⠛⢛⣿⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠉⠛⠻⢿⣶⡶⠛ ⠉⢀⣀⣤⠟⠁⢸⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⡶⣦⣻⣼⡏⠀⠀⠘⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠶⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⢶ ⠛⠋⠉⠀⢀⣴⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠋⠀⠈⢷⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣧⣀⣠⡴⠶⠞⠻⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣿⡛⠛⠶⠶⠶⣤⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣤⡴⠖⠛⣫⡟⠀⠀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⣸⠇⠀⠀⠀⣼⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣿⡋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣀⠀⢀⣈⣿⡖⢶⣤⣤⣀⠉⠛⠛⠛⠷⣤ ⣀⣴⠟⢻⡿⠀⠀⠀⣰⠟⢷⣄⡼⠋⠀⠀⣀⣴⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣿⡛⠓⠶⠶⢶⣲⡶⠲⠶⠚⠛⠉⣙⡿⠿⠋⠉⠙⠋⠛⢦⣝⢷⣄⣀⣀⡀⠀ ⠉⢀⣴⠟⠀⠀⠀⣼⠃⠀⠀⢻⣇⠀⢠⡾⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⣶⣶⢦⣤⣤⣤⣤⣀⣈⣙⣷⣶⣶⡿⠋⣙⣷⣶⠶⠶⢛⣯⡤⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠷⣭⣻⢯⣭⣭ ⡶⠋⠁⠀⠀⢀⣸⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣦⡾⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣴⡶⠛⠛⠶⠞⠛⠛⢷⣶⠶⠶⠶⠯⣭⣀⡀⢀⣴⠟⠉⠻⢿⣿⡶⠏⠀⠀⠈⢻⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠛⠳⢶ ⠀⣀⣀⣴⠞⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠻⢦⣤⣤⠶⠖⠲⢾⣿⠿⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣷⣄⣤⣤⣤⣽⠟⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠛⠷⣿⣟⠛⠛⠛⠳⣦⣄⣀⣀⡀⠀ ⠛⠉⢁⣠⡞⠁⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣠⣴⠾⠛⢳⣤⣴⠟⠛⠷⣦⣠⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠷⣤⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⡴⠟⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣄⣀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠉⠉ ⠛⠛⣻⠟⠀⣠⣤⣤⠶⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣠⡾⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠃⠈⠛⢶⣦⠶⢤⣤⣤⣀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠙⠷⠶⠶⠶⠾⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢿⣽⣟⠛⠓⠶⠶⢦ ⢛⣿⢏⣴⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⡾⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣷⣤⡀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣄⠀⠀⠙⠛⠶⠶⠛⠳⠾⠳⠶⣤⣄⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣴⠶⠶⠶⣤⣀⣀⡀⠈⠙⢿⣿⣟⣛⣛⠓ ⣛⣵⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣴⠟⢁⣤⣤⡀⠀⢀⣤⡾⠋⠀⠈⢿⡄⠀⠀⠀⢻⣶⣤⣤⣤⣄⣀⠀⣀⣠⣤⣄⠀⠈⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠙⠳⣦⣤⣄⣀⣉⠉⠛ ⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⡴⢶⡶⢿⡿⢛⣷⣿⢻⡟⠿⠷⣿⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠛⠷⣬⣍⣛⠉⠁⠀⢉⣿⣷⣤⣤⣤⣤⣤⡴⠶⣦⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠛⠶ ⣤⣤⣤⣤⣶⠿⢿⣿⡾⠋⠀⠈⠙⠋⣱⡟⠀⢿⡄⢠⡿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠛⠛⠛⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠁⢀⣠⣴⠶⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠙⢷⣄⣀⣀⡀⠀⢀⠀ ⣤⡴⠞⠋⠁⢠⣿⡴⠞⠶⠶⠶⠞⢻⡟⠀⠀⠈⣿⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠻⣦⣤⣄⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣴⠶⠾⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢿⣭⣙⡛⠋⢙ ⣀⣠⣤⠴⠶⣻⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠃⠀⠀⠀⢹⣧⣤⡀⠀⠀⢀⣤⠴⠶⢦⣄⠙⠷⣍⣉⡛⡛⠛⠛⠻⣿⣿⣿⣛⣋⠁⣀⣀⣠⣤⣤⣴⠶⠿⣶⡶⠶⣤⣤⣤⣄⡀⠀⠈⠉⠛⠿ ⠉⣁⣤⠶⠞⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣾⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⡌⠙⢷⣴⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣤⣈⠉⠉⠙⠷⣦⣤⣀⠈⠉⠉⣉⣋⣩⡿⠿⠞⠋⠀⠀⠀⠘⢷⣦⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠳⢦⣤⣄⣀ ⠋⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⠶⣞⣯⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣧⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⣄⠀⢀⣀⣀⡈⠙⠛⠛⠻⠶⣦⣀⡉⢛⣻⣿⠟⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠷⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙ ⠶⠶⠞⢛⣩⣽⠿⠛⣻⣿⣿⢿⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⣯⡉⠉⠻⢶⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⢷⣶⣶⠶⢤⡤⢤ ⠛⠒⠛⠋⠁⣀⣤⣾⣵⡟⢡⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣤⠶⠾⠶⠶⢦⣬⡛⠷⣤⣀⣙⣻⢿⣿⣛⠛⠛⠶⣤⣤⡤⠶⢶⣶⣾⣛⣛⡛⠛⠛⠻⠛⠛⠳⣤⡀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠛⠶⠶ ⠶⠶⣶⣶⠟⠛⠉⣡⡟⠀⣼⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣷⡀⠀⢀⣴⣦⠈⠛⢷⣬⣙⣋⠉⠻⠶⠿⠷⣦⣤⡼⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠋⠻⣦⣤⣤⣄⣀⣀⠈⠛⠷⠶⠤⠶⠶⢤⣄ ⠾⠛⠉⠀⣀⣤⢾⡿⠁⣰⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣦⡾⠃⢻⡄⢀⣀⣬⡉⠉⠛⠷⢶⠶⠶⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢻⣄⡈⠉⠉⠙⠛⠳⠶⢦⣤⣤⣤⣌ ⣤⡴⠶⠞⠋⢡⡞⠁⢠⡟⠀⢀⣴⣦⡴⠶⠶⣦⣀⣀⣀⣀⣤⢶⡟⠀⠀⠘⣿⠋⠉⠈⠛⢷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣈⣛⣿⣛⣶⠶⠦⢤⣤⣤⣤⣀⣈ ⣀⣀⣀⣀⣴⡟⠀⣠⡿⠀⢀⣾⠃⢸⣇⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣌⠉⠀⣼⠇⠀⠀⠀⢹⣧⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⢶⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠶⢶⣄⣀⣤⡤⣴⡶⠟⠻⢿⣭⣉⠉⠻⣦⣀⣀⠀⠀⠈⠉

I just spent style too much time making a matplotlib one. Example output: http://imgur.com/PtkkESv import pylab import scipy def gaussian(x, centre, xscale, height): return pinnacle * scipy.exp(-(2.*xscale*(x-eye))**2) def triangle(x, centre, xscale, height): y = pinnacle * (ane. - scipy.accented(xscale*(x-eye))) return (y>0) * y ten = scipy.linspace(0., 1., 1501) shape = triangle#gaussian# def generate_noise(x, num_bumps, centre_min, centre_max, xscale_min, xscale_max, height_min, height_max, shape=shape): y = scipy.zeros_like(x) for i in xrange(num_bumps): centre = centre_min + (centre_max-centre_min)*scipy.rand() xscale = xscale_min + (xscale_max-xscale_min)*scipy.rand() height = height_min + (height_max-height_min)*scipy.rand() print centre, xscale, superlative y += shape(x, centre, xscale, tiptop) return y def generate_line(x): y = scipy.zeros_like(x) y += generate_noise(ten, 100, 0., ane., 0., 300., 0., .003) y += generate_noise(ten, 10, .25, .75, xx., thirty., 0., .03) y += generate_noise(10, 10, .29, .45, 20., 30., 0., .03) return y num_lines = 85 line_gap = .015 for i in xrange(num_lines): base_line = (num_lines-i)*line_gap y = base_line + generate_line(x) poly = pylab.Polygon([(10[0], base_line)]+zip(x, y)+[(10[-1], base_line)], facecolor='m', edgecolor='none', zorder=i) pylab.gca().add_patch(poly) pylab.plot(x, y, 'w', linewidth=2, zorder=i+.v) pylab.gcf().patch.set_facecolor('black') pylab.gca().set_axis_bgcolor('m') pylab.axis('equal') pylab.gcf().set_size_inches(8., 8.) pylab.savefig('pulsar.png', facecolor=pylab.gcf().get_facecolor(), edgecolor='none', dpi=150)

Whoah, that's a nice i. I wonder whether the original Arecibo data-set of the pulsar is still effectually somewhere. I tried to detect information technology, but I didn't succeed.

fieldswormuch1985.blogspot.com

Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5728124