Um, actually, none of the above, but thanks for asking.
Maybe I can make myself a bit clearer. I am interested not in the traditional form of ascii art, i.e.
o
+
^
but rather something more like:
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@---------@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@
@@@@@—@…@@@@@…@—@@@@@
@@@@–@@…@@…@@@…@@…@@–@@@@
@@@–@@@…@@…@@@…@@…@@@–@@@
@@@-@@@@@…@@@@@…@@@@@-@@@
@@@–@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@–@@@
@@@@–@@@…@@@@@@@…@@@–@@@@
@@@@@—@@…@@@@@@@…@@—@@@@@
@@@@@@@—@@…@@—@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@—@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@---------@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
It’s supposed to be a smiley face (you can see it better if you squint). This is only using three different characters, and I imagine would work much better if the source was photorealistic, not my crappy version of everybody’s favourite emoticon friend.
So, as you can see, I am actually talking about the process of creating a greater image, with each individual “pixel” being represented by an ascii character.
Why would anybody want to know how to do something as inane and potentially pointless as that? Three reasons:
-
It looks cool.
-
It would, I would imagine, frequently contain long strings of the same character (a black background would, depending on the enconder’s settings, I imagine, provide the viewer with an awful lot of .s a lot of the time). This would lead to quite a decent compression rate, which would make it a reasonably viable artform for the internet.
-
Um… It looks cool.
You know, it’s kind of hip, kind of Matrix-y, and also kind of nerdy (if you consider those last two points to be mutually exclusive).
So, now that I have made, hopefully, a little clearer what I am on about, if anybody knows whether this has been done (a video enconder, etc), could they please let me know, because I would love to start getting my home videos converted to dots, squiggles slashes and dashes.
Cheers
. @ / -