July 21, 2004
Design by serendipity: you supply the text, typoGenerator googles random images and adds effects for interesting results.
It would be better if the googled images actually had something to do with the text, rather than just a mix of colors, shapes and text. I'd be curious what it would come up with, that way.
you know, I know lots of Meta people didn't like it? But I do. Design elitists be damned!
From their FAQ:
how does typogenerator work?
the user types some text; typoGenerator searches images.google for the text (italics mine) and creates a background from the found images, using randomly chosen effects. then it places the text, using random effects too.
You never know what you'll end up with; Google comes up with some strange matches.
Yeah, I saw that, and I'm not knocking it at all, but I ran quite a few things through it, and not one photo image I could discern appeared.
Some of the results are interesting, but I was entering words like "Bush" and "war" and "monkey", and didn't see any photos at all.
I tried this. Got only a few coloured and overlapping letters from a single word in the sentence (ie "strange") I used.
These were shoved way off to the upper right of the visual, whole thing on a background of varied grey blocks.
result: unsatisfactory, orrelevant, dull
Pfui - irrelevant.
Too random for a satisfying pixeltoy.
There was a free program, called N-Gen, which mixed built-in photos, fonts, graphics and shapes with user-supplied text to 'generate' collages, suitable for posters and CD covers. I loved it; even while, due to legal reasons, never used it on actual client jobs, it was fascinating to watch the permutations, plus it helped to spark compostion ideas.
via... Metafilter?
via j-walk.
« Older Curious George: | Bayesian Probability Newer »
To post comments to a thread you must login or create a profile.
