(MPEG: who knew earthquakes could be so wiggly and delicious?)
What this needs is several small, rampaging children in halloween Gozilla costumes. Then it would be truely perfect.
Makes me hungry just looking at it :-)
Not sure that video was an earthquake so much as the artist occasionally kicking the table.
Although I think it says something rather disturbing about me that I find something vaguely phallic about the motion of some of the tall, pointy buildings. (But then, I do have "homoeroticism" listed as one of my interests, so that ought come as no surprise.)
uh. had the same reaction. what does this say?
Says I've been watching too much porn, I reckon.
or that i haven't been watching ENOUGH!
Too much, not enough. It's a fine line.
Hey baby, wanna go for a ride on my jello skyscraper?
jell-o is people
fucking genius. yay!
I adore your journal so I had to add you hope you don't mind. If you can stand another friend I'd love it if you could add me back.
Rock on and don't get caught in any wiggly quakes.
Telegraph Hill in Jello? We must stop this now, or else we'll find it the beginning of a slippery slope into madness. It will have a chilling effect, or worse, it will help gel the opposition! The little Golden Gate though was cool, it left me feeling a sense of suspension at the stability of it's colloidal foundation.
This would be the perfect set for a re-filming of Attack of the 50 foot Woman.
Wobbly fruity-colored SF really wants to be an openGL screensaver hack. It cries out for it, "make us into a hack, pleaweeweeweeweeweese!"
All those meshes would be huge? C'mon, there's always room for jell-o.
That would be sweet. However, writing a shader to make realistic backlit Jell-O might be a challenge.
Also, it may be hard to do the motion efficiently without the ability to do texture fetches in the vertex program. (Then you could have textures represent the modes of vibration rather than process a zillion vertices on the CPU.)
Ray Tracing Jell-O Brand Gelatin, Paul Heckbert, SIGGRAPH '87, pp. 73-74; reprinted in Communications of the ACM, Feb. 1988, pp. 131-134. Scholarly commentary on USENET, 1988. Further commentary, 1996.
Oh wow, I can't believe I forgot about that! I saw that talk live at SIGGRAPH 87, it was hilarious!