Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Graffiti Drone

Soulskill posted about 7 months ago | from the vandalism-goes-high-tech dept.

Technology 126

tedlistens writes: "KATSU is known for his adventurous and speculative vandalism, but his new project is not fake or hypothetical, though it does elevate his work to new heights. He has developed a system to attach a spray can to a quadcopter, creating one of the world's first graffiti drones. The drone is capable of spraying canvases or walls hundreds of feet high, granting the artist access to spaces that were previously inaccessible. At the Silicon Valley Contemporary art fair, which opened Thursday, KATSU is showing a series of drone-painted canvasses — and preparing to take the drone out on the town. 'There are a lot of disadvantages to drones, you know. It's not like, "oh, I'll slip off the edge of this bridge and die,"' he tells the Center for the Study of the Drone at Motherboard, which also has a video. 'Its like, "I might have the drone drift off and I might kill someone."'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Heh... (1, Funny)

the_skywise (189793) | about 7 months ago | (#46725277)

Demolition Man was off by about 20 years...

For the Swarm! (4, Insightful)

Baby Duck (176251) | about 7 months ago | (#46725283)

I will be more impressed by a dozens of drones simultaneously spraying, crossing streams to make more colors.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725333)

You said crossing the streams was bad!

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 7 months ago | (#46727341)

no problems when doing it in the men's room

Re:For the Swarm! (2)

Buck Feta (3531099) | about 7 months ago | (#46725345)

Don't cross the streams it would be bad.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

invictusvoyd (3546069) | about 7 months ago | (#46725361)

Which would mean a dozen nozzles .. The recoil .. I'd be surprised if they can achieve any form of art unless there is some AI component involved.

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

cusco (717999) | about 7 months ago | (#46725595)

They're taggers, it's not like they're doing art now either.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

GTRacer (234395) | about 7 months ago | (#46725739)

[...] it's not like they're doing art now either.

Wait, are you saying it isn't art because:

* They're tagging and therefore it can't be art
* Grafitti isn't art no matter how it's executed
* This particular tagger isn't talented enough to be an artist

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

mlk (18543) | about 7 months ago | (#46726111)

Tags as a general rule are shit. Wow you wrote you name on a wall. Well done. Have a cookie. Some times effort is put into a tag, but lets be honest, most people do not.

It is still "art", it is just shit art. That should be painted over.

That not the case for all tags (but 99.9999% of them). Grafitti however as a general rule is meh. Some of it can be great, some of it can be shit (wow it is a very good dick you just spray painted on a wall).

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

unrtst (777550) | about 7 months ago | (#46726165)

[...] it's not like they're doing art now either.

Wait, are you saying it isn't art because:

* They're tagging and therefore it can't be art

* Grafitti isn't art no matter how it's executed

* This particular tagger isn't talented enough to be an artist

Pretty creative quoting there... you snipped our a whole two words so you could exclude the main point/categorization - they're taggers. That invalidates the latter two points, and the first point is much easier to approach - is tagging art?

Defining "art" is completely subjective. Was Duchamp's "Fountain" art? IMO, that piece is about as far as I'd push the definition, and I'm still not sure if it is. It did make a significant statement, but it did far more with the piece than tagging a building. (almost) anyone can sign their own name, and can do so anywhere, so there would have to be something else to justify a signature on some random piece of property as "art". In "Fountain", there was timing involved in what was happening at the time, the exhibit in which it was displayed, and a very minimal level of object manipulation to justify a change to the original (turned on its side, placed in a different environment than it's normally seen, and signed).

So, what does a tagger need to do for his tag to be considered art to you? (graffiti and other works do not apply here)

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

GTRacer (234395) | about 7 months ago | (#46726409)

I promise I wasn't trying to misrepresent the original - I was trying to get at the distinction between tagging and graffiti. I always thought tags were small-scale graffiti signatures. Not the larger-scale mural-style pieces to be sure, but what few I've seen have occasionally been creative.

Hm. I guess in the usual cop-out way, I'd say I'd call it art if it seemed like art. But more seriously, if the tag was more interesting that a straight signature, or was intriguing in some way I'd call it art.

Also also, I wasn't defending tagging (or graffiti btw) as art that should be protected and enshrined. I agree it's still vandalism.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

cusco (717999) | about 7 months ago | (#46726739)

Murals are not the same as graffiti, even if they were done without permission. At least that's my opinion, YMMV. I used to know a muralist, and there's a lot to it. I've known a couple of taggers, and truthfully, if a crackhead can do it then I have trouble considering it 'art'.

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726299)

Wait, are you saying it isn't art because:

* They're tagging and therefore it can't be art

* Grafitti isn't art no matter how it's executed

* This particular tagger isn't talented enough to be an artist

Yes. Why does that confuse you. Graffiti isn't art and the punks that do it aren't artists.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

GTRacer (234395) | about 7 months ago | (#46726433)

I guess art is subjective - I've seen plenty of graffiti I'd easily consider art. Not so sure about tags - still sorting out the distinctions.

And as I mention above, I know it's vandalism (unless they go out of their way for permission, which does happen now and again). Doesn't preclude it being art as well.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 7 months ago | (#46727235)

Art and vandalism are not compatible for my definition, in the case of tags and graffiti.

Art is what you do for the sake of doing it or admiring the result, and, you know, there are walls in your bedroom too.
Vandalism means satisfying the naturally present thirst for recognition by destroying/defacing stuff, or imitation of previous vandals. It's not art because it has a different purpose. The artwork is not art, the way it was produced may be art.

The only art piece here might be the drone, for the guy who simply wants to try its feasibility, not for those who buy the finished model.

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726559)

It's not art because it was scrawled/painted on *my* shit and so *I* get to decide. I say paint over it all. Simple as that.

Re:For the Swarm! (2)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | about 7 months ago | (#46726985)

It isn't art when it defaces other people's property.

Re:For the Swarm! (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 months ago | (#46726573)

They're taggers, it's not like they're doing art now either.

Don't confuse "tagging" with "graffiti".

Tagging requires neither skill nor talent and is done by bored kids who think they're gang members.

Actual graffiti artists (think Banksy) can create some really good pieces which people actually collect.

Some graffiti artists have some pretty mad skills, and create some really good pieces.

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726611)

Just because people collect it doesn't make these eyesore art or these vandals artists.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 months ago | (#46726969)

Just because people collect it doesn't make these eyesore art or these vandals artists.

Just because you don't like it doesn't prevent it from being art.

There has been graffiti for thousands of years in one form or another, and there will continue to be. Hell, cave paintings can be considered some of the first forms of graffiti.

There are places which have dedicated graffiti walls, because some of the art is pretty damned incredible.

Does changing it from being on a wall where you have permission magically turn it into art? Or does it just make it legitimate vandalism?

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46727151)

Just cause its art doesn't prevent it from being an eyesore.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 months ago | (#46727233)

Just cause its art doesn't prevent it from being an eyesore.

So, you're categorically saying all graffiti is an eye sore? You've seen all of the graffiti in the world and concluded none of it has merit? You've discounted the possibility that people have asked people to put up murals in some places?

Wow, you are good. What's it like to be omniscient? Did you know I was going to ask that?

Re:For the Swarm! (2)

cusco (717999) | about 7 months ago | (#46726773)

I really think the so-called 'graffiti artists' really should be considered muralists, whether they had permission to paint their mural or not. It's a constructive act, meant to create something attractive or at least meaningful. Graffiti and tagging are destructive acts, only slightly better than tossing a rock through a window.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 months ago | (#46726895)

Graffiti and tagging are destructive acts, only slightly better than tossing a rock through a window.

Meh, by the time you learn to be one of these 'muralists' you've gone through a lot of bad graffiti.

Sometimes graffiti is political or culturally significant (think "Eric Clapton is God"), and has been with us since the ancient Greeks. It's not likely to go away.

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725639)

Which would mean a dozen nozzles .. The recoil .. I'd be surprised if they can achieve any form of art unless there is some AI component involved.

No AI, it's called cybernetics. It's the same field that keeps the drone flying, and it's trivial to find the force of the spray can and calculate positive feedback to counter it.

Re:For the Swarm! (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 7 months ago | (#46725719)

Which would mean a dozen nozzles .. The recoil .. I'd be surprised if they can achieve any form of art unless there is some AI component involved.

Building an "inverted pendulum" is a pretty common engineering school assignment. Not too sophisticated, but neat and far more complicated than simply compensating for propulsion from spray paint.

The countermeasures will be far more interesting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725591)

I will be more impressed by the counter drones that blow these fuckers out of the sky and trace back their telemetry, ultimately strafing the vandals who sent them with gatling guns full of spent U238 bullets, cleaning up both our streets and the gene pool.

Re:The countermeasures will be far more interestin (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 7 months ago | (#46725717)

ultimately strafing the vandals who sent them with gatling guns full of spent U238 bullets, cleaning up both our streets and the gene pool.

Brutally murdering people for graffiti aside, why would a gun be full of spent rounds?

Re:The countermeasures will be far more interestin (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 7 months ago | (#46726187)

ultimately strafing the vandals who sent them with gatling guns full of spent U238 bullets, cleaning up both our streets and the gene pool.

Brutally murdering people for graffiti aside, why would a gun be full of spent rounds?

The GP is talking about depleted uranium rounds [wikipedia.org] They are used mainly for armor piercing because the rounds are very dense and can be made thinner than a lead round of the same density to decrease drag. Why the GP feels we need these to hunt down some guy with a can of spray paint, I couldn't tell you.

Re:The countermeasures will be far more interestin (1)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | about 7 months ago | (#46727543)

Why the GP feels we need these to hunt down some guy with a can of spray paint, I couldn't tell you.

Wait until your entire neighborhood get covered in gangsta-like tagging, and then you will understand the reason for this.

Re:The countermeasures will be far more interestin (1)

GTRacer (234395) | about 7 months ago | (#46725759)

A DPU strafing would clean the gene pool, but I doubt it would have the same effect on the streets, gibs and all that...

Depleted uranium cleaning up the gene pool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46727339)

If by cleaning up the gene pool, you mean polluting urban centers with carcinogenic depleted uranium, so that many more innocent bystanders' DNA gets damaged...

Re:For the Swarm! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726115)

Crossing the streams would be bad.

Well, thats a bummer. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725285)

This takes all the fun out of graffiti. There always has been some kind of mark of artists pride to have people look at a tag and say "How the bugger did they get up there?"

Now it will just be "Oh, high-tech vandals." The magic is gone

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1, Interesting)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 7 months ago | (#46725353)

No, the magic has moved from the person willing to risk his life to the team of persons intelligent enough to create a machine that is controllable from a distance and not beholden to the laws of gravity.

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

the_skywise (189793) | about 7 months ago | (#46725371)

To be fair, it's STILL beholden to the laws of gravity!

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

kruach aum (1934852) | about 7 months ago | (#46725403)

"and which can fly" doesn't sound as poetic though!

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

the_skywise (189793) | about 7 months ago | (#46725417)

True... true...

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725433)

...Drones still obey the laws of gravity

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725535)

But not The Law. Unless they are police drones. Usually. Sometimes they ignore the Constitution.

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

mythosaz (572040) | about 7 months ago | (#46726963)

9.8 meters per second squared. It's not just a good idea, it's the law.

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

cusco (717999) | about 7 months ago | (#46725629)

Oh, no, there will still be plenty of fun available. I, for instance, am getting bored with using my sling and slingshot at stationary targets, a moving target would definitely be more entertaining and challenging. I've never thrown a bolo either, but that seems like the ideal weapon to use on one of these since cast nets don't have the range. I'll have to make one this weekend in case this moron comes to Seattle.

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about 7 months ago | (#46726235)

This takes all the fun out of graffiti. There always has been some kind of mark of artists pride to have people look at a tag and say "How the bugger did they get up there?"

Now it will just be "Oh, high-tech vandals." The magic is gone

The "magic" has been gone from graffiti since the early 80's. In the US at least. I rarely see anything other than tags these days, and not many of those are all that impressive any longer. I've seen some pretty nice graffiti in Europe though. Germany in particular.

Re:Well, thats a bummer. (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 7 months ago | (#46727473)

What bugs me is that with the element of being "hands on", it really does discourage tagging on things like private single family housing as there's the very real possibility that a home owner and will defend his property. With a drone.. not so much.

Low quality art. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725291)

That graffiti looks like shit.

Re:Low quality art. (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 7 months ago | (#46725659)

Or you have no appreciation for art.

Re:Low quality art. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725805)

That's because art died when people with no skill [wikipedia.org] started calling themselves artists.

This is a real artist [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Low quality art. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725823)

As an art critic, I can say that the artist has perfectly captured the deeper essence of feces. The conflicting colors, the subtle implication of corn, you can almost smell it as you observe this metaphor for what was once a proud life, now drained of most of its resources and left to the cruelties of nature.

touche' (1)

mccrew (62494) | about 7 months ago | (#46725885)

...wish I had mod points for you today.

Anti CCTV (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725389)

Could work against CCTV cameras ... add opencv and have it go automatically find cameras.

I expect... (4, Interesting)

msauve (701917) | about 7 months ago | (#46725411)

He's not going to complain when the police drones provide a counterpoint by dousing him with pepper spray, right?

Re:I expect... (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 7 months ago | (#46726333)

Dunno, but I think law enforcement should ideally be held to a higher standard than someone running around calling themselves the Japanese word for breaded pork tenderloin.

Re:I expect... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726459)

Then whatever you do, don't go to Los Angeles!

Re:I expect... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 7 months ago | (#46726615)

Dunno, but I think law enforcement should ideally be held to a higher standard than someone running around calling themselves the Japanese word for breaded pork tenderloin.

So, what do we infer about a poster calling themselves 'interkin3tic'?

Does this convey credibility to you? Or should we discount your opinion as that of someone who has allowed l337 speak to become a factor in his life?

Re:I expect... (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 7 months ago | (#46727267)

You probably shouldn't trust me with a badge, a gun, and a drone-mounted pepper spray.

And I probably shouldn't trust you to get my point. My point, joking about his handle aside, was that "turnaround would be fair play" is not true when talking about law enforcement, which seemed to be what msauve was suggesting.

Re:I expect... (1)

msauve (701917) | about 7 months ago | (#46727425)

Although it varies by state, in general pepper spray may be used wherever use of physical force is. Protecting property from damage usually falls into that category.

He is a seriously lame dickhead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725449)

He is a seriously lame dickhead, just wanting attention, is not an artist.

People like this need to be put into the stocks (1)

fredrated (639554) | about 7 months ago | (#46725485)

so the public can pummel them with rotten fruit.

Re:People like this need to be put into the stocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725515)

"People like this"

Artists? Technological tinkerers?

Re:People like this need to be put into the stocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725573)

Vandals

Re:People like this need to be put into the stocks (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 7 months ago | (#46725787)

Depends on the target. Personally, I wouldn't so much mind these vandals white-washing road-side billboards. The casino light displays can be darned near blinding when driving at night or early in the morning. A fresh coat of paint would be an illegal public service.

Re:People like this need to be put into the stocks (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46725593)

"People like this"

Artists? Technological tinkerers?

"People I don't like"

where have all the flowers gone? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725501)

do we need cattle? http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bunkerville

Great, just what we need (5, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 7 months ago | (#46725513)

More graffitis in cities...

I wish those so-called "artists" practised their art on canvas at home or something, instead of ruining cityscapes and costing taxpayers millions for cleanup.

Re:Great, just what we need (3, Informative)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46725673)

More graffitis in cities...

I wish those so-called "artists" practised their art on canvas at home or something, instead of ruining cityscapes and costing taxpayers millions for cleanup.

Methinks you are conflating "professional graffiti artist" with "idiot taggers."

graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com] taggers are those wastes of flesh with nothing better to do than hose a wall with random lines and shapes, then claim it's some sort of "signature."

Regarding this KATSU person, it appears from a Google image search [google.com] that he's of the latter group.

Re:Great, just what we need (2)

CRCulver (715279) | about 7 months ago | (#46725737)

graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com]

You know what's really cool? Getting the permission of the owner of a property (or local government) before practicing one's art. The painting can be as whizbang as one can imagine, but without that authorization from whoever owns or manages the wall, "cool" is not the word for it.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46725891)

graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com]

You know what's really cool? Getting the permission of the owner of a property (or local government) before practicing one's art.

Whoever said that never happens?

Of course, part of the problem with government permission is that the people running the local government are often morons (at least, that's my experience), so they ignore the requests from good artists, and instead award the contracts to buddies of buddies.

The painting can be as whizbang as one can imagine, but without that authorization from whoever owns or manages the wall, "cool" is not the word for it.

That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I disagree.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725985)

Of course, part of the problem with government permission is that the people running the local government are often morons (at least, that's my experience), so they ignore the requests from good artists, and instead award the contracts to buddies of buddies.

So what? If you don't get approval then tuff shit. You have no right to deface someone else's or public property with your eyesore graffiti.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about 7 months ago | (#46726529)

Whoever said that never happens?

You told your fellows here to look at a Google image search where there were both murals painted as a result of some community-authorized project and others painted without permission. For you to now claim that you were advocating for authorized artworks is disingenuous.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 7 months ago | (#46726651)

Whoever said that never happens?

You told your fellows here to look at a Google image search where there were both murals painted as a result of some community-authorized project and others painted without permission.

My fault, I suppose, for forgetting about all the pedants out there. Sorry for presuming the whole of my audience was not petty, and intelligent enough to understand the point I was making without requiring me to break out the whiteboard and markers and draw it out point-by-point.

For you to now claim that you were advocating for authorized artworks is disingenuous.

I've claimed no such thing, and in fact have implied the opposite - when you said that you believed, "'cool' is not the word for [unauthorized art installations]," I specifically disagreed with that statement.

Your outrage is misplaced.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46727479)

graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com]

You know what's really cool? Getting the permission of the owner of a property (or local government) before practicing one's art.

They never got our permission to take up all the good spots.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725753)

Real professionals get permission and permits first.

If KATSU is doing this without pre approval then he's no different than any other punk with a spray can.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726229)

graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com]

You are confusing eyesores with art.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726603)

There is so much BS required to actually paint something I can see how artistic types who can think outside the box will ignore the average persons tenancy to embrace authoritarianism.

You can't even get a permit without paperwork and $$$ fees. We are so bad that you can't even exercise your 1st amendment rights without a permit. (no, not speech, the peaceable assembly part we don't care defend... and we didn't put up much of a fight when free speech zones were put up. no fight at all when money === speech. We tax the press but not churches. WTF? In my city the largest land owner downtown is the church, they make millions; it's no wonder they act more like a business...)

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | about 7 months ago | (#46725679)

The cities are just as much to blame as the people you insult with your quotes.

Even just restricting it to graffiti, cities do stupid things like declaring chalk is graffiti - even though it washes away with rain - and arresting kids.

The artists don't destroy neighborhoods, the cities let them get destroyed so that they are incredibly ugly, refusing to clean them up. At least until some kid comes along and paints a wall that is falling down. Then finally the city comes in and white washes it. Simultaneously they leave the subway stations full of dirt and garbage, smelling of urine, being unwilling to whitewash them.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

CRCulver (715279) | about 7 months ago | (#46726137)

Even just restricting it to graffiti, cities do stupid things like declaring chalk is graffiti - even though it washes away with rain.

Even temporary vandalism can have an effect on property values and, assuming the broken window theory holds (which I myself am uncertain of), possibly crime rates. So, it makes sense to prosecute those creating images with chalk without the authorization of whoever owns or manages the surface they are covering.

Re:Great, just what we need (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726471)

You've got to tell me, I'm incredibly curious, does being that dumb hurt?

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726537)

The artists don't destroy neighborhoods,

Artists don't vandalize other peoples property with their eyesore graffiti.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

I'm not god any more (613402) | about 7 months ago | (#46726227)

More graffitis in cities...

Not if there's a huge army of cleanup drones.. From the look of that video we'll see cleanup drones before graffiti drones.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

Khashishi (775369) | about 7 months ago | (#46726345)

Look at the video. He IS practicing on canvas at home. It just doesn't reflect in his skill.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726391)

He'll then leave home and start vandalizing other peoples property with his eyesore graffiti.

That's the problem.

Re:Great, just what we need (1)

akirapill (1137883) | about 7 months ago | (#46726407)

And yet, when disgusting glass and steel monstrosities start blighting gentrified neighborhoods, the 'property rights' brigade thinks that's all well and good. I'd call that ruining a cityscape infinitely more than a little paint from someone trying to develop a positive creative outlet. (yes I am aware that some graffitti is gang-related - that type tends to have (much much) lower artistic value) I guess the rights of real estate developers to make money mean more than the rights of people who actually live there to determine what their neighborhood looks like.

Re:Great, just what we need (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726461)

And yet, when disgusting glass and steel monstrosities start blighting gentrified neighborhoods,

One of those went though a legal approval process to get permission.

If you don't like it you can go fuck yourself. Graffiti is just straight up eyesore vandalism.

vandals or arrogant pricks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725597)

Yeah street "art" is all fun and games, until someone paints up YOUR property.

Vice magazine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725609)

I hope slashdot is getting paid to link to Vice magazine.

I hate graffiti! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725671)

It would be great if he'd slip off the edge of a bridge and die.

Waiting... (2)

Richy_T (111409) | about 7 months ago | (#46725695)

For the big yellow smiley face on the statue of liberty in light-sensitive paint.

Re:Waiting... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 7 months ago | (#46725901)

That's just asking for a red drop of human bean juice to be painted on it.

Not impressed. (1)

jcr (53032) | about 7 months ago | (#46725709)

Let us know when he can actually control it. Right now it looks like he's channeling Jackson Pollock.

-jcr

Re:Not impressed. (2)

bluescrn (2120492) | about 7 months ago | (#46726325)

I don't really want to give him ideas, but attaching a pair of wheels/castors to the front of the drone might allow it to roll up and down a large/smooth vertical 'canvas' with far less flying skill than required for a close hover...

Re:Not impressed. (2)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 months ago | (#46726599)

What would be a good UI for this? Too automated, and it's just a big inkjet printer. (You will see research papers doing that in the next few years, I'm certain.) This is fine except the art wouldn't really be getting anything new from the medium, just printed in a different way.

But joysticking in 3d to operate on a 2d canvas doesn't seem right either.

I respect his talent, but .... (1)

King_TJ (85913) | about 7 months ago | (#46725849)

Like other people said, it's too bad these artists disrespect the property rights of others.

It takes some practice to fly these drones well, even though they have such high-tech features as on-board GPS systems and smartphone or tablet software as control devices in many cases. They're usually smart enough to do things like stop moving and hover in place, when they lose a control signal, until you catch back up with them. But flying one precisely enough to draw actual paintings with spray paint is surely not something everyone can just run out and do well.

I'd like to see this become a new "thing" ... but in a more acceptable setting. I think people would enjoy watching or even pay to see good artists creating art with flying drones -- but spraying it on places where they were ALLOWED to do it!

Re:I respect his talent, but .... (1)

Khashishi (775369) | about 7 months ago | (#46726507)

In the jungle there are no property rights.

If you consider the environment some of these youths were raised in, yes, it's a jungle.

Re:I respect his talent, but .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46727581)

If you consider the environment some of these youths were raised in, yes, it's a jungle.

Grafitti advocates like to emphasize that graffiti is not merely the province of "ghetto" youth but is a hobby and art pursued by people of all walks of life, including squarely middle-class people from city suburbs.

Baseball bat (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46725861)

Smack. Dead.

If only it were that easy with the Angels of Death that the governments can afford, which hover above us and can record and kill anyone at any time. It's a dystopian technocracy, all this. The exact opposite of what the future was supposed to become like. And you're all cheering them on. Except for a few enlightened souls with zero power.

So many questions... (1)

mark_reh (2015546) | about 7 months ago | (#46726211)

If the drone contributes 50% or more of the final output, is it still art? Even if the drone didn't contribute, would it still be art?
How usable with this be high up in the air next to a building when the wind is blowing?
What about the air pollution produced by spraying paint with VOCs all over the place? Are graffiti "artists" insensitive to environmental concerns?

I think it would be better to use the quad blades to lift the drone to the desired height then use a ducted fan or other technology to adhere the thing to the building and then spray under real control, without the wind blowing the drone all over the place. After completing the "art", it would detach itself and fly back home.

Re:So many questions... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726669)

It's graffiti. There is no point in worrying about how much the drone did because it's not even art in the first place.

Can't Wait (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46726323)

Free targets for my Beeman .25 pellet rifle. You tag, you get shot.

Tagging (1)

TheDarkMaster (1292526) | about 7 months ago | (#46727011)

I suppose that what you Americans call "tagging" is known in my country (Brazil) as "pichação". This "art" is made by animals marking their "territory", and the only thing that works well against this urban blight is a good bullet in the head. Or even better, two bullets to ensure. There is no more depressing thing than seeing your entire city tagged by these animals (And believe me, they also act and talk like animals).

That is *not* a Graffiti Drone ... (1)

Qbertino (265505) | about 7 months ago | (#46727059)

That is *not* a Graffiti Drone, it's an RC Quadcopter with a Spraycan attached. Hopelessly imbalanced and overladen, aimlessly spraying paint about and barely even hitting the space it's supposed to paint on, let alone drawing anything remotely resembling usefull graffity.

These guys have a long way to go.

My 2 cents.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?