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!

cancel ×

187 comments

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

ANOTHER one!! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805764)

Wow, *another* project from Fabrice Bellard? DAMN!!!

By the way, who the hell is he?

Re:ANOTHER one!! (5, Insightful)

gg3po (724025) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805850)

I know he's the guy [wikipedia.org] behind ffmpeg [sourceforge.net] (used by most *nix media players) and the excellent qemu [bellard.free.fr] emulator that I use every day.

Re:ANOTHER one!! (1, Offtopic)

quinto2000 (211211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806661)

Wow, your "mod the parent insightful" in the signature trick works pretty well. Second time I've seen it in action...

SLASHDOT MYSOGYNY (0, Flamebait)

Asshat Canada (804093) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805772)

Hoooray to /. and it's perpetuation of crappy mysogyny!

Today's fortune:
"I've finally found the perfect girl, I couldn't ask for more, She's deaf and dumb and over-sexed, And owns a liquor store. "

Re:SLASHDOT MYSOGYNY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805810)


It's true, tho. Having a fuck doll who can't nag you, can't hear you, and enables you to get drunk would be the perfect life.

God, I can't wait for the Christian Facists to finish taking control in America -- then we can finally put the women back in the kitchen and laundry room where they belong.

Now lets get some NTSC (5, Interesting)

ankhcraft (811009) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805790)

Once someone posts how to do this with NTSC (which you'll need if you're in the U.S. like me), I'll be all over this! Anyone? Enlighten me...

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (0)

ebh (116526) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805909)

I imagine that would be pretty tough, since NTSC is interlaced, unlike PAL or SECAM. but I can't say for sure having never hacked broadcast video RF signals.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

grub (11606) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805952)

You can get progressive scan HDTV in North America, no?

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

ankhcraft (811009) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806005)

You can get progressive scan HDTV in North America, no?

Yeah, but that would be even *harder* to do here. (read: impossible)

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

b1t r0t (216468) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806145)

HDTV in North America uses ATSC/8VSB, not DVB-T/COFDM. It also sounds like the guy in the article "cheated" by using a DVB-T modulator. I can't see anywhere that shows where the MPEG stream to feed into the modulator came from.

The best part of TFA is at the end where he gushes about "This project can be the basis for foo, bar, and baz", then at the end "Where is the source code? It is currently not available, although I plan to release it someday, provided enough people ask me to." Sounds like "this project" can be the basis for approximately zilch right now.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (3, Informative)

b1t r0t (216468) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806245)

Oh gee whiz... I think I figured it out now. What he did was make a grayscale image that resulted in a signal which was equivalent the unmodulated data stream. So the VGA card was esentially being used as an enormous shift register. In that case, it would definitely take some work (and an 8VSB modulator) to make it generate ATSC.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (2, Informative)

terrymr (316118) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805966)

Both of those are interlaced too ... pal is really NTSC with some minor tweaks and I expect the same goes for SECAM

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (2, Informative)

nightznoe (626458) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806265)

Actually no. PAL is pretty different from NTSC, PAL used 50Hz and NTSC is on 60HZ (interlaced). This has to do with the electrical system used in Europe vs. NA. Also PAL and SECAM uses different scanning velocities than NTSC, mainly due to the fact that PAL has more lines. Another major difference is PAL and NTSC signal bandwidth, IRC from my digital video compression course. PAL has an 8MHz per channel bandwidth, and NTSC only has 6Mhz.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806368)

You might want to mention the primary difference, the very reason why PAL is called PAL (Phase Alternating Line). Contrary to NTSC, PAL inverts the phase of the signal every other line. This cancels out phase errors and provides a much more stable color reconstruction. NTSC is jokingly referred to as "Never The Same Color" because it uses a manual tint control to correct phase errors.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806431)

Actually NTSC and PAL are related, SECAM is totally different. Notably PAL includes some protection against phase-disturb that make it a lot stronger than the Never Twice Same Color

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

taniwha (70410) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806703)

you're both right - PAL and NTSC's colour encoding is similar (PAL reverses its phase every other line to help with the sort of interferance caused by your neighbour's electric drill). PAL does use more bandwidth and a slightly different color space and can render more saturated colors than NTSC (think bright eye grabbing adverts). PAL also has more pixels/screen (better resolution) but a lower frame rate (not so good for sports) - this has more to do with the underlying B/W TV standards they were built on top of though, which in turn were based on the local power line rates (in order to avoid AC humbars on those old B/W sets

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806700)

Just as a side note for those that don't know.. NTSC is standardly 60hz (60 fps for those not that able to comprehend the other uses for the word hertz) while PAL is 50hz. Done in computer video, it's 29.97 and 25 FPS as digital.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (2, Informative)

Cramer (69040) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806997)

You're confusing fields and frames... NTSC has 60 interlaced fields per second generating 30 frames per second. The reason you generally cannot see that flickering is due to the retentative properties of your eyes and the phosphor pixels in the TV. PAL is the same at 50 fields / 25 frames.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

ltbarcly (398259) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806756)

NONONO PAL is significantly different then NTSC. There is more color information inm the PAL signal but a lower frame rate.

The resolution is also slightly different.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

bullitB (447519) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806024)

PAL is also interlaced.

The correct analog (as in "analogy," not as in the opposite of digital) for this would be a mechanism for making an ATSC transmission. which could be tuned into from an OTA HDTV tuner. You could encode 1280x720 progressive ("720p") or 1920x1080 interlaced ("1080i") video signals into MPEG-2 then send that to an HDTV.

Not sure how far people have gotten rolling their own ATSC transmitters, tho.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806365)

I guarantee you, your time and money would be better spent buying an existing item to do such a job. A couple good products for such a job are sold from a little company in South Dakota named Sencore [sencore.com] , the HDTV 996 [infocommiq.com] or a ATSC 997 [infocommiq.com] would do the job pretty well. They have some newer things, even a PCI card, shame the catalog hasn't been updated in a while.

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

no_such_user (196771) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806078)

a) NTSC wouldn't be a good comparison, as NTSC (AFAIK) only defines analog color broadcasting. ATSC would be the equiv here in the states.

b) The interlaced part wouldn't be the stumbling block -- 720p (aka progressive scan) is one of the ATSC standard modes. The hard part would be the 8VSB modulation, which is a totally different creature than the 16QAM modulation used in the european standard.

That said, WHAT A NICE HACK!

Re:Now lets get some NTSC (1)

no_such_user (196771) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806120)

Hmm... wait. I guess he does provide analog PAL and SECAM modulation. Oh well -- yeah, NTSC would be cool too.

Never Twice the Same Colour (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806229)

...as we call it over here.

It's a digital stream .... not NTSC (1)

taniwha (70410) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806505)

it would be an MPEG2 encoded stream, not PAL nor NTSC ... the picture size and/or frame rate may be different but with any reasonable system you should be able to do exactly the same thing in the US

Guerrilla television in 2007 (4, Interesting)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806554)

I suspect we may start to see illegal broadcasts in 2007 in poorer urban neighborhoods of the USA.

With all broadcast television on VHF/UHF scheduled to cease on New Years Day 2007, there are going to be a lot of pissed off people who don't have cable getting nothing but static on every channel.

This is assuming that UHF/VHF broadcasting actually does go off the air Jan 1, 2007. It doesn't seem likely at this time, but it is mandated by the TeleCom Act of 1996. And one never knows what the current administration is going to do.

Let's assume that it does happen. All the middle-class people won't notice it because they are paying monthly cable fees and cable TV will not be affected by the VHF/UHF shutdown. However, let's assume that in poor neighborhoods the convertor boxes don't work well, or are prohibitively expensive, or are too technically complex for the general population. Suddenly there's no television.

Well politics abhors a vacuum. We may find ourselves in a situation where people simply start pirate broadcasting on the unused television channels. This will probably cause problems with the new uses of the spectrum (private cell phone communications, I believe). The FCC will be really busy trying to track down pirate TV stations. Pirate TV stations are rare now because they can't compete with broadcast network quality, and there are outlets on local cable access for speciality and non-professional broadcasters.

But with the UHF/VHF channels gone off the air, people will start filling it up with DVD broadcasts. Maybe even porn broadcasts. Unregulated, and without commercials. All illegal.

These channels could become political if there is an economic downturn or a return of conscription into the permanent, endless war that the administration has promised the defense contractors and campaign contributors. Alternative broadcasts of police beatings at demonstrations made by tiny CamCorders alternating with current Hollywood movies downloaded from the DarkWeb could become common content on the new pirate channels.

I wonder if anyone is considering the possibility of this happening before they decide to shut down UHF/VHF broadcasting in 2007?

Re:Guerrilla television in 2007 (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806794)

Guess youy'll be watching a LOT of Canadian TV in 2007, eh? http://www.cdtv.ca/en/faq/index.htm#13 [www.cdtv.ca]
How Long will Conventional Analogue TV Signals Be Available?
...

The earliest that analogue stations may be allowed to shut down in Canada has yet to be determined but it is likely to be beyond the year 2010.
...

OS Support (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805804)

Linux is better blah blah..

But I've Windows, any chance of getting Windows to do this?

Kill those Utah lawmakers! (1, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805806)

Re:Kill those Utah lawmakers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805834)

In Soviet Russia, Lena has pictures of you.

Re:Kill those Utah lawmakers! (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805837)

This [lenna.org] coming right after the story about Utah? Slashdot, are you trying to cause the Utah law to fail?

Sorry for the bad link in the original. I should have previewed first, I know :(

GOATSE LINK! MOD PARENT DOWN! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806075)

EWW!

Re:Kill those Utah lawmakers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806294)

How about "sorry for slashdotting lenna.org?"

This [archive.org] coming right after the story about Utah? Wayback, are you trying to cause the Utah law to fail?

Re:Kill those Utah lawmakers! (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806573)

Quick note, the parent is a little NSFW.

OMG JACKSON IS GONNA GET IT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805817)

Jurors reach verdict in Jackson trial

SANTA MARIA, California (CNN) -- Jurors in the Michael Jackson child molestation trial told the trial judge Monday that they have reached a verdict.

The announcement came after about 32 hours of deliberations.

Earlier Monday jurors requested the continuation of the reading of the teen accuser's lengthy testimony, sources close to the case said. The accuser was on the stand for four days in March.

Meanwhile, attorneys for media outlets, including CNN, filed another motion with the court Monday, demanding access to hearings where the court is answering jurors' questions and requests to listen to the reading of previous testimony.

"Barring the public from these final, pivotal stages of this case is, from a constitutional standpoint, simply intolerable," the media attorneys argued in their motion.

Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Rodney Melville has set a hearing for Thursday on a previous request to disclose jury questions and release transcripts of hearings.

Media attorneys have been pressing the judge to move up the hearing's date, arguing that their request will be moot if the jury reaches a verdict first.

Jackson's attorneys have filed a motion opposing the media's request, arguing that providing public access to the jury's questions, and hearings related to them, "would invade the confidentiality of the jury deliberation process and would threaten Mr. Jackson's right to a fair trial."

Sources said Melville and attorneys in the case have met at least three times as jurors deliberated.

The jurors adjourned Friday afternoon, ending six days of discussion on the 10 accusations against the pop star.
Spokeswoman dismissed

Jackson's Web site said Friday night that the singer had fired his spokeswoman, Raymone Bain, who has been with him throughout the trial.

"MJJ Productions regretfully announces the termination of Raymone Bain and Davis, Bain & Associates. We thank you for your services," said the complete text of the statement at www.mjjsource.com.

Lead defense attorney Thomas Mesereau Jr. visited Neverland ranch Wednesday after a flap arose over who should speak for Jackson.

Mesereau received court permission to release a statement saying that he had "not authorized anyone to speak or hold press conferences on behalf of Michael Jackson or his family."

Jackson and his family posted a similar statement on his Web site.

Jackson fans and supporters have joined the media from around the world outside the Santa Maria courthouse each day for news of a verdict.

Jackson, who is not required to be on hand for deliberations, has been awaiting the jury's decision at Neverland with his family.

The 46-year-old pop star is facing judgment on 10 counts, stemming from events that allegedly took place with a 13-year-old boy two years ago: four counts of lewd conduct with a child younger than 14; one count of attempted lewd conduct; four counts of administering alcohol to facilitate child molestation; and one count of conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment or extortion.

Jackson has denied the charges and pleaded not guilty.

CNN's Dree De Clamecy and Rusty Dornin contributed to this report.

I just wish.. (-1, Troll)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805819)

... I could start a thread where everyone got passoinate about any subject in every thread here on /.!

Then I'd become a professor or some teacher or something!!!

Please Mod me "Offtopic"! I'm an Oldfart (TM) who likes seeing young folks getting into heated discussions about their passions I guess I'm an - An "Old Troll"!

Thank you!

Thank You!!!. (0)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806070)

'Nuff Said

Thank you Sir! , May I have another!! (1)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806195)

'Nuff siaid

Has been done with music for a while (5, Interesting)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805823)

There's an X program that can transmit an MP3 to your radio by displaying pictures in certain ways. Quality's not too good, but it works. I guess it was just a matter of time before people did it with television.

It also goes to show TEMPEST attacks are real. Your screen is transmitting what's on it in a way that's detectable over quite a distance. Shielding is worth looking at if you're doing something sensitive.

Re:Has been done with music for a while (2, Interesting)

Evil W1zard (832703) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805912)

TEMPEST based attacks have been proven as viable a long time ago and I'm not sure this would qualify as a TEMPEST issue as you are purposefully broadcasting a signal for reception... Now if you are only considering sending the signal to your TV set and only your TV set then TEMPEST would be a concern (but considering the cost of some TEMPEST equipment I don't think that is much of a worry for a home user trying to mod out their home equipment).

Re:Has been done with music for a while (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806098)

He didn't say this was a TEMPEST attack. He said it shows that they are real. In other words, it demonstrates to the unbelieving that there is a link between EM waves and what shows up on your tube.

Re:Has been done with music for a while (4, Informative)

Rei (128717) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805986)

You're talking about Tempest For Eliza" [erikyyy.de] . I never got the "broadcast an mp3" function to work, however - only the broadcast using their special midi-like files. A shame, really. Still, even the midi-like broadcasts make for a neat geeky party trick, and demonstrate the power of tempest ;)

Link (1)

emkman (467368) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805994)

It's called Tempest for Eliza [erikyyy.de] . I remember it being pretty cool when I tried it a few years ago in high school.

Re:Has been done with music for a while (2, Interesting)

UserChrisCanter4 (464072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806381)

About ten years back, my brother had a very simple watch/PIM (Personal info manager, for those of you unfamiliar with term) made by Casio, IIRC. The unique feature was that you installed a driver which allowed the data input program to mess with your refresh rate (I'm guessing) and transmit the information to the watch. It usually took four or five tries to get it right, but I remember being pretty impressed with the unique method that helped avoid keeping track of a dongle/connector.

Re:Has been done with music for a while (2, Interesting)

csnydermvpsoft (596111) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806426)

I used to have one of these as well. I always thought that it worked by displaying a pattern of lines on the screen, which the device then picked up.

Re:Has been done with music for a while (1)

UserChrisCanter4 (464072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806707)

Now that you mention it, I think you're correct. It's been a while, and I only remember seeing my brother holding it up to the screen. I suppose the line method would probably be easier to implement, as well.

High Resolution N00dz. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805828)

Check it out, a half-meg pair of boobs. I can smell the smoking server from here.

Neat Idea (1)

wackysootroom (243310) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805846)

This is a great idea. If there is a way to make the signal just a bit stronger you can hack your own wireless media center.

Irony (1)

pmc255 (828453) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805880)

Isn't it ironic that there's a link to the Lena picture right above Utah's attempt at blocking porn?

It Won't Be Long (2, Insightful)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805889)

Until this project is rendered illegal in the US under some DMCA-style bullshit. After all, you might be able to (gasp!) record something off of your incoming television signal.

Of course, only pirates and pedophiles will have a use for this project.

(The last part of this post is a JOKE, gawddammit!)

It Won't Be Long-People start to learn. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805948)

"(The last part of this post is a JOKE, gawddammit!)"

Actually both parts are because it relies on the readers ignorance of what the DMCA actually says.

Re:It Won't Be Long-People start to learn. (1)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806042)

Thanks for chiming in, Orrin. Here's the latest amendment [arl.org] to the DMCA for you to peruse.

Its only ten pages, so you should be able to wade through it in about two days.

Slashdot lawyers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806215)

Here's some reading for you. It's only one page. You should be done in about a week.

http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog_name =CTLG&product_id=15-2572 [radioshack.com]

Guess their lawyers understand the DMCA better than yours.

Re:Slashdot lawyers. (1)

geomon (78680) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806289)

You go to Radioshack for legal advice?

I'm bookmarking your post for posterity. It is a classic.

I also said, if you cared to read the original post, that it would be illegal in the future. That would mean this device would *also* be illegal.

And Radioshack's attorneys would just advise the production staff to quit making them.

Radioshack - for legal advice... That's good.

Re:Slashdot lawyers. (1)

harrkev (623093) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806577)

You've got quesions. They've got answers.

What was the subject again?

Re:It Won't Be Long (2, Informative)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806614)

Until this project is rendered illegal in the US under some DMCA-style bullshit.

More likely it would be something originating from the FCC. Unlawful use of radio bandwidth without a license, use of a class B device to intentionally generate interference (a competing unlicensed coherent signal is interference, but I may have the wrong class of device).

Re:It Won't Be Long (1)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806851)

My HAM Radio license allows me to use a small portion of the UHF band to broadcast video at low power. However, I must have my call sign in the picture or as a 'bug' in the video image.

Whatever method I use to generate the signal, as long as I remain within the power and frequency band, there's not going to be any major problems.

I'd love to be able to generate an NTSC signal like this. Some of the transmitters for HAM radio are expensive.

very clever (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805890)


+1 point
shame he wont tell/show anyone how its done (ie. the source code)
-2 point

Re:very clever (1)

pslam (97660) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806646)

shame he wont tell/show anyone how its done (ie. the source code)

The only thing he hasn't explained is how he generated the raw unmodulated DVB and PAL signals. PAL is pretty text book and there's no need to explain it. Creating a DVB signal is a huge project in itself. You can look up the details relatively easily and freely, and I think the GNU Radio project even has one.

As for the signal generation, he's given you the XFree86 timings, and explained the calculation behind it. What more could you want?

The clever bit is the way he's worked out the correct VGA timings and used harmonics to place the DVB signal at just the right frequency to be received. It's an underused trick you can do with DACs and ADCs: if you turn off the filter (or just have a crappy one like VGA cards do!) then you can reach frequencies far above half the sampling rate, with certain restrictions. It doesn't defeat nyquist - you basically move the "band" you're looking at to somewhere other than starting at 0Hz (DC). If it's a hack like this one which doesn't have an appropriate bandpass filter, you get a lot of crud in your signal, but presumably it's not enough to destroy the signal altogether.

I assume there's an issue with the Hsync and Vsync which aren't eliminated - but at a 76.5MHz pixel clock, it's probably a small enough glitch to not matter.

It's a nice trick I've been thinking of using for DAB (digital audio) receive and transmit, but I never thought of using the VGA in this way!

oh man.. (2, Funny)

p373 (689997) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805904)

The slashdot effect + a nudie photo. Say goodbye to that server.

Mormons, beware: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805914)

WARNING - story post contains link to PORNOGRAPHY!

Re:Mormons, beware: (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805970)

you better warn all residents of Indiana too. they're about nearly as backwards and narrow as those of utah.

Re:Mormons, beware: (1)

msdschris (875574) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806164)

Hey, not all of us residents of Indiana are natives. How on earth did I end up here?

Re:Mormons, beware: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806492)

Are there a pair of legs wearing ruby slippers sticking out from under your house? Trust me, steal the shoes, you'll thank me...

what the.. (0, Offtopic)

Bauguss (62171) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805915)

who in their right mind would post a link to a site with a playboy nude on it to Slashdot???

Talk about asking for a slashdot "effect"

Mass panic (2, Funny)

parasonic (699907) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805925)

Now if I had some DV software and a little time, I could do a re-play of the "Martians are attacking us!" program. A re-creation of that 50's-ish alien invasion hysteria to my roommate or next wall neighbor. What advanced alien race wouldn't transmit digital TV?

The Lenna Story. (4, Interesting)

British (51765) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805947)

....is more interesting than the main one. At my company when I started 6 years ago, I stumbled upon the Lenna picture, just thinking it was an ordinary pic. Few years later I saw the er, um "full" pictures. Didn't know she had a cult following.

Yes, that Lenna picture I assure you is still in use after all these years. A pretty "hello world" image.

Re:The Lenna Story. (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806232)

I've been tinkering with that business of hiding a greyscale image in the spectral data of audio (a la Aphex Twin, etc.). At the moment, it's still in Mathmatica code, and I've been looking for a decent test image.

Seems like I've found it.

Oh, and Lena looks nice on my desktop. I wonder what her image sounds like.

Re:The Lenna Story. (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806599)

I'm wondering about getting it on a tshirt (with a program encoded in using dataglyphs), thinking it would be an instantly recognisable geek thing. Is it not so well known?

Re:The Lenna Story. (2, Informative)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806635)

The story of her pictures is apparently very well known in video processing circles, and /. ran an article some time ago about it which introduced her to everyone else ;)

I had never heard of her before, but then again, I've never dealt with any kind of photography or video processing.

Watch out internet! (1)

Toe, The (545098) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805951)

Watch out internet!

Porn just found a whole new outlet. :/

Aw, c'mon guys... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12805959)

Stop hogging the bandwidth with the full size [lenna.org] Lenna image! All I want to do is read the text (honest) and it's taking ages...

crap .. (3, Informative)

macaulay805 (823467) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805965)

I clicked on the link while I was at work, now I'm waiting for the network security people to remove me from my workstation.

On a side note: WARNINGS PLEASE!

Re:crap .. (2, Interesting)

harrkev (623093) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806127)

The funny thing is that I saw the edges of that picture on the original web page. That looks just like the "lena" picture that I used to use at a target back when I took my image processing class. That "lena" was a picture of a girl's face wearing a fancy hat.

Is this new picture different?

Re:crap .. (1)

_anomaly_ (127254) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806418)

Is this new picture different?

No. This "new" picture is the same one you used, just possibly a different crop of the original.
You probably should have followed the other link [cmu.edu] in the article summary before posting.

Re:crap .. (1)

harrkev (623093) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806549)

You probably should have followed the other link in the article summary before posting.
I was afraid of following ANY link for fear of getting fired.

Re:crap .. (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806414)

Don't worry, you'll be retirement age by the time the naughty image loads.

I can't see it! (0, Offtopic)

n6kuy (172098) | more than 9 years ago | (#12805981)

Internet access to the requested website
has been denied.
URL: www-2.cs.cmu.edu/%7Echuck/lennapg/lenna.shtml

C AT: GPORN

this is all you need to see... (1)

bob_greatguy (874175) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806049)

unless you like "reading the articles" :)
http://www.lenna.org/full/len_full.html/ [lenna.org] (nudity)

Re:this is all you need to see... (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806079)

Way to go - slashdot Lena why don't y'all...

Re:this is all you need to see... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806179)

ATV (3, Interesting)

leighklotz (192300) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806068)

You can do ATV [nasa.gov] legally in the US with NTSC, with a ham license.

You can see this the video for yourself, with stuff you have at home right now. There are cable channels that are on ham bands, but it's OK because their signals stay on the cable.

If you live in the SF ba area, hook a UHF antenna (vertically polarized) to your cable-ready TV or VCR with TV out, and tune to cable channel 57 (421.25 MHz), and aim it at Mt. Hamilton (east of San Jose).

Here are some tests on 1.2GHz [nasa.gov] , which is also a ham band.

Re:ATV (1)

leighklotz (192300) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806095)

I forgot to mention that the NASA Ames folks plan to re-transmit live space shuttle video from STS-114 over the K6BEN repeater, so you can pick it up on cable channel 57.

Re:ATV (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806227)

Cool! So instead of pounding out morse code, you can instead send pictures of dots and dashes!

(Hey mods, I keed, I keed!!)

Re:ATV (2, Informative)

leighklotz (192300) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806590)

< Cool! So instead of pounding out morse code, you can instead send pictures of dots and dashes!

The original post has some questionable legality issues; I'm showing you a way to do it legally, and get peer support. It's still bog-standard TV modulation, not morse code. And you don't need to learn morse code to get a license to do ATV [arrl.org] .

Probably the biggest problem is the use of harmonics -- the proposed system uses the 5th harmonic of a VGA output, which happens to fall in the VHF TV band. What about the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, (and higher?) Doing this with the support of other people who know what they're doing will help you avoid these problems:

Let's see:

  • Fundamental: 25.71Mhz
    25.550-25.670Mhz is assigned for radio astronomy. So you'd be interfering with SETI research (slightly away from the band but close enough to interfere if the signal isn't clean, which it won't be).
  • 2nd harmonic mixed with 76.5: 178.71MHz
    The article said TV channel 5, but it's not so in the US. See this chart [arrl.org] .
  • 3rd harmonic mixed with 76.5: 153.64MHz
    Police and fire VHF radio frequencies, in the US.

The list goes on, since mixing both adds and subtracts the frequencies and their harmonics.

And who can forget the plasma TV transmitting the 121.5 MHz international distress signal [slashdot.org] ?

Bottom line: don't hook this thing to an antenna.

NSFW?!? (1, Insightful)

natron 2.0 (615149) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806102)

Hey editors, how about a NSFW warning on stories such as this!

Re:NSFW?!? (1)

xlv (125699) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806324)

What are you talking about? Yes, some of the Lenna pictures that can be accessed indirectly from the site are not safe for work but all the pages you open when clicking on the links in the story description are safe for work unless a portrait picture of a woman is not safe and in that case, please let us know where you work so we can avoid that place...

Dude. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806354)

It's not even full frontal. What kind of work do you have where they are that hard-ass?

Re:NSFW?!? (1)

British (51765) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806870)

My workplace blocked the website, citing malicious software could come onboard.

*sigh*. A digital tv tuner I don't have, being hosted on free web page service in France.

It just simply wasn't meant for me to read this article.

Do I Understand correctly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806306)

This only transmits, but does not encode the signal. What is outlined on this page is just the easy part.

Other famous pr0n (1)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806359)

Now can someone turn up the original photo that Tim Skelly used for the starfield in Star Castle... The stars are nice, but I'd like to see the actual photo he happened to have in the drawer to pick coordinates.

I don't understand...please explain. (1)

zutroy (542820) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806450)

I'm interested in this, but I don't understand the practical implications (mainly because I have no idea what most of the acronyms mean). Does this mean I could plug my computer into my digital TV tuner somehow and be able to watch it on my TV? If so, does it work with US digital TV equipment (such as the Motorola set-top boxes that Comcast provides)?

Re:I don't understand...please explain. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806780)

Answers are: yes and no (for now).

This is great (1)

Bruha (412869) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806503)

Just hook everything up to the pc and let it do the conversion and display your video at the native resolution on your DTV.

First Edition: 9/27/96 (0, Offtopic)

trakta (589854) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806530)

Can you all stop visiting lenna.org please? I'm trying to get me some nekid goodness and it's taking, like, forev-her. Though on a nostalgic note, it is rather like almost-ten-years ago...

All about Lena (Lenna) (1)

alphakappa (687189) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806609)

A brief history of Lena [ecogito.net] . The page is worksafe, but if you wish to click, there are links to non-worksafe images of Lena over there.

first pOst (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12806624)

What provides the Rshe had no fear

Guys, this is no small feat (4, Insightful)

o'reor (581921) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806957)

and yes, I am a (former) DVB-T engineer (and a consultant in digital video broadcasting at large -- yes, I know a bit about the US and Japanese standards too).

What Fabrice is telling us here is that he has managed to produce a real-time (or close-to-real-time) DVB-T/DVB-H software COFDM modulator, the output of which may be broadcast via the DAC converters of the video board. Given the complexity of the generated signal (more than 6000 subcarriers, not including pilot subcarriers which are used as beacons for the demodulator, and paying respect to the guard interval -- sorry for the technical gobbledygook), this usually requires a dedicated ASIC. Don't forget to include the preliminary phases of the encoding : creating an MPEG-2 video channel, an MEPG-2 transport stream (OK, he did it using a modified MPEG library), then encapsulate this into MPEG-2/DVB frames, add the Reed-Solomon code, perform the interleaving procedure, pour in some Viterbi encoding for redundancy, and feed it to the input of the DVB-T modulator, phew ! you're done.

I want to say hats off, ladies and gentlemen, to this outstanding performance. The Free Software movement definitely needs more guys like Fabrice, and we all need to encourage him into publishing more of his code.

Chapeau bas, mon cher Fabrice !

Re:Guys, this is no small feat (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12807041)

It's not realtime. He's rendering to a PGM file, and then by displaying it. Not easy, but it's not a replacement for custom hardware.

video instead of images (1)

felipe.ledesma (870813) | more than 9 years ago | (#12806990)

is there any way I could use this to output video instead of still images? I would like to watch that DiVX flicks I have in my HD...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>