15 Responses:

1. netsharc says:

   13 years ago at 12:07 am

   The modern art critic in me says, "An apt representation of people's lives nowadays, do something repeatedly and tediously for x hours a day.".

   if you had to do it, at least you know it will only be a 12-hour job. No less, no more.

   I was wondering if I should post that observation on YouTube, but somehow I don't think the other commenters would appreciate it.

2. shmooilk says:

   13 years ago at 12:18 am

   I doubt they'd redraw twelve hours. I'd have to assume it was a 60 minutes loop for the minute hand superimposed on the 12 hours loop for the hour hand.

   Still, there's no telling from what's there in the video.

   • andrewducker says:

     13 years ago at 12:28 am

     The faces wouldn't line up...

     • shmooilk says:

       13 years ago at 12:32 am

       I assume you're referring the the guy's face. There's always the ability to either move the head off-screen before coming back for the hour move or smoothing the transition between the animations.

     • randomwalter says:

       13 years ago at 3:25 am

       I think shmooilk meant they could use the same animation every hour and just put a new hour hand on it.

       Still, damn cool clock.

   • charkes says:

     13 years ago at 9:21 am

     What about when the minute hand overlaps the hour hand? He'd have to erase both. That couldn't happen if the hour hand was superimposed. Hmm.

     • shmooilk says:

       13 years ago at 12:57 pm

       Those could have been just specifically made.

       I'm not saying I know how this was made, but making it a whole, consecutive thing seems a bit far-fetched, even if it does take him less than a minute to draw each move...

       • jwz says:

         13 years ago at 12:59 pm

         Someone go do some research already instead of arguing about it.

         • shmooilk says:

           13 years ago at 1:07 pm

           Everything I've been reading says it's a 12-hour loop.

           For the guy's sake, I sure hope that's just a fib to make the work more alluring. I doubt, though, that anyone would actually sit in front of the clock for 12 hours and test this theory :)

   • jwz says:

     13 years ago at 10:04 am

     That would look hokey and obvious without a lot of video-compositing work after the fact. Putting 12 consecutive hours into a piece of art isn't really unusual. I wonder if he took a bathroom break, though? I guess he could have just worn an Adult Party Garment.

3. andrewducker says:

   13 years ago at 12:29 am

   I'd actually pay to have that clock.

   • pavel_lishin says:

     13 years ago at 8:40 am

     Yeah, but think of how much it would cost to feed the guy inside!

4. nzchrisb says:

   13 years ago at 9:01 am

   http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2009/12/clock_shows_video_of_dude_erasing_a.html I think it's only 60 minutes worth of drawing.

5. that_xmas says:

   13 years ago at 10:26 am

   Oh yeah. I saw that in Amsterdam. It's at the side building of the Rijksmuseum (err...I'm not sure if that is spelled correctly). The museum is being renovated, and this is one of the few hundred things you can see there now.

   It was pretty nifty.

   • holywar says:

     13 years ago at 7:16 pm

     Damn, you beat me to claiming to have seen it in person. I was just at the Rijksmuseum a couple of months ago, and I'm pretty sure I spent more time watching that clock than looking at any of the other works they had on display.

     As for guesses as to how he does it, what I saw (and I saw at least one hour change if not two) could be done pretty easily in a 60-minute loop with a few others to get the hour change. He kept disappearing and reappearing, so it wouldn't be that hard to match up. I just assumed that's what he did, because the thought of doing that for twelve hours straight is hard to fathom.