Radiohead Secretly Hid an Old App in the Anniversary Edition of OK Computer“Old” is a very relative term when talking about computer history. By the looks of it, however, Radiohead hid a computer program on the tape that comes with the 2. OK Computer, and making it work feels like time travel. That’s because you’ll need an . Well, that’s being a little bit dramatic. Some Redditors realized that the first track on the cassette was the bleepy startup sound for the ZX Spectrum and wondered if the blippy noise at the end of the tape might also be Spectrum- related. Since the Paleolithic home computer used audio cassettes to run software, the idea that the bleeps and blips were actually code was a smart one. The fact that Jonny Greenwood, Radiohead’s lead guitarist and keyboard player, owned a Spectrum ZX and learned to code Sinclair BASIC, the computer’s operating system, sheds even more light on the fun Easter egg. Radiohead even used a Spectrum ZX to create some of the sounds in “Let Down” on the original OK Computer release. But back to the silly computer program. After failing to pump the raw audio through a Spectrum ZX emulator, Redditor Maciej Korsan applied a 3. Hz low pass filter to the noise and tried again. Magically, the Spectrum ZX fired up an adorable little program called “Radiohead.” First came the band members’ names and a date, December 1. OK Computer’s original release date: Followed by one last very endearing line: Then it’s just noise—bright colors, random letters and symbols, and more bright colors. According to You. By the looks of it, however, Radiohead hid a computer program on the tape that comes with the. In life, nothing is ever colored perfectly, and spots of suspiciously similar pixels in a photo might be evidence of a doctored photo, according to former Adobe. Artisteer - web design generator for Joomla templates, Wordpress themes, Drupal themes, Blogger templates and DNN skins. Tuber Ooo. SLAJEREKoo. O, there’s at least one more Easter egg hidden inside the main Easter egg: “Also, inside the code there’s a hidden, black text on a black background: “congratulations.. We should get out more.”Here’s a video of the full program, courtesy of Ooo. SLAJEREKoo. O: It’s unclear when Radiohead made this cute little computer program. If it was indeed in December 1. Aphex Twin (a. k. Richard James) secretly hid a demonic- looking face in one of the tracks on his 1. Windowlicker. The demon face is most likely Richard James himself, doing his sinister smile, and it took two years after the release for anybody to find the image. As with Radiohead’s new Easter egg, neither Aphex Twin nor its record label advertised the hidden message. According to a 2. Wired, an electronic musician calling himself Chaos was “playing around with Win. Amp one evening when he spotted the diabolical face.” Without going into too much detail, James apparently hid the images in this song and others using the Mac- based synthesizer Meta. Synth. If you really want to geek out about it, here’s a great blog post about “the Aphex face” that includes phrases like “logarithmic frequency scale.”If all this leaves you wondering about the future of vinyl and cassette tapes and CDs, that’s a good thing. Radiohead has always gone to brilliantly creative lengths when it comes to making and distributing their albums. The band let customers pay whatever they wanted, including one cent, to download its 2. In Rainbows. Then, they turned around and sold the same fans a tricked out vinyl/CD box set for $8. The boxed edition of OKNOTOK, the OK Computer 2. It includes the remastered album on three vinyl records, along with some drawings, a book of lyrics, some of Thom Yorke’s “scrawled notes,” a sketchbook of “preparatory work,” and, of course, that C9. Spectrum ZX computer program on it. Is it all worth it? That depends on how big a Radiohead fan you are. How to Tell if a Photo Has Been Doctored. Nearly every photo online has been edited in some way, whether through cropping, filtering, compressing, color- correcting, or other generally innocuous touch- ups. But a lot of people attempt to pass off doctored images as true ones, leading to hoaxes, crackpot theories, and more than one trip to Snopes for some fact- checking. You can do the world a service by helping those around you identify real photos against fake ones. Here’s how: Look for Poor Editing First. Glaring mistakes should be the first way you identify a doctored photo. If you think something’s been modified, a helpful tip is to look around the area you believe is edited. Warping around a subject is a pretty clear indication of photo manipulation. Check out hands, feet, and faces, common areas where you may find the lingering presence of poorly erased objects like jewelry, blemishes, or debris. Low- resolution images might make mistakes harder to discover, so consider blurry camera photos and video footage with a grain of salt. Lighting is Key. If two people standing next to each other are lit in a different manner, one of them might have been inserted after the fact. The same goes for objects added to photos. If the light falling on the object doesn’t correlate with the rest of the highlights in the photo, it’s probably been edited. Check Out Repeating Pixels. You might have a photo of a bright blue sky, but every blue pixel is a tiny bit different, and can’t just be replaced by a blue paintbrush. Some tools, like the brush or clone tool in Photoshop, depend on using identical pixels to reproduce whatever you’re cloning or coloring. We’ve seen a few great online tools for learning how to use the manual settings on a camera before, . Poor cloning also leaves behind duplicate artifacts, like clouds, or even fingers in the worst offenders. Obvious giveaways, to be sure. EXIF Data is Your Friend. After you pore over a photo for edits, you still might not be convinced. That’s when you should take a look at the photograph’s EXIF data, metadata embedded in a photograph when it’s taken. Cameras store metadata in photos associated with the make and model of camera, settings used to make the photo (including ISO, focus, and shutter speed) among other pieces of information. Photo editing tools and photo copying may remove bits of metadata, or add metadata indicating the photo has been modified. A lack of metadata often means it was removed, making it harder to identify the source of the image and verify its validity. If someone is trying to pass off a disingenuous photograph as true and it’s lacking metadata, be wary of its source. Sites like Exifdata and Metapicz are web- based options for checking the EXIF data of your photos. Suspect metadata you should look for often includes the date the image was created, which could be the day the modified photo was created rather than the day it was taken.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
August 2017
Categories |