[HN Gopher] Word-as-image for semantic typography
___________________________________________________________________
Word-as-image for semantic typography
Author : GaggiX
Score : 97 points
Date : 2023-03-06 03:28 UTC (19 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (wordasimage.github.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (wordasimage.github.io)
| world2vec wrote:
| This is so neat, well done!
|
| My parents own a small construction business and their logo is...
| well, not very good IMO and relatively old and outdated. It's
| just "Family Surname + Construction Co." with the surname having
| a vague suggestion of a house. It wasn't that cheap back then, so
| they never want to change it because "we spent some money on it,
| why do it again?".
|
| Can't wait to try this and see what comes up, bet I can improve
| it a bit and I have zero typography/design skills.
| seumars wrote:
| I can assure you they're not going to need another wordmark
| with another vague suggestion of a house in it. Just write the
| business name in a solid and readable typeface.
| kiru_io wrote:
| This is pretty cool!
|
| If the author is here. Is there a way to try it myself?
|
| The Demo[0] link is broken and the GH repo is empty[1].
|
| [0] https://huggingface.co/spaces/SemanticTypography/Word-As-
| Ima...
|
| [1] https://github.com/WordAsImage/Word-As-Image
| Y_Y wrote:
| The paper is attributed to "Anonymous Authors" and the GitHub
| has an image saying "comming soon" [sic] added five days ago.
| Of course the image is generated using this technique, but it's
| anyone's guess what it represents, a person sitting for
| meditation?
|
| This is pretty cool, but also spooky. For example it seems like
| this has good commercial promise, as well as a serious amount
| of work invested, very strange that there's no person or
| company taking credit yet.
|
| (edited to add, I see now that "comming soon" uses the "o" from
| their "Ashtanga Yoga" example)
| erostrate wrote:
| There is a likely innocent explanation: authors are required
| to stay anonymous while an academic paper is being peer
| reviewed.
| O__________O wrote:
| Yes, their names are listed here:
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.01818
| tristanho wrote:
| Hmmm yes, I wonder if this project was discovered/shared here
| before it was really ready to be published.
|
| Very excited for the code/demo when they're ready!
| O__________O wrote:
| Someone might want to ping the authors to let them know paper is
| on HN's home page:
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.01818
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| Are the chinese examples as legible as the english ones? The
| english transforms are comprehensible because only one letter was
| changed, if more or all were it would get difficult to
| understand.
|
| To me it looks like proportionally more of the content-carrying
| form has been modified in the chinese. But I can't read chinese
| and so can't evaluate.
| mshockwave wrote:
| the Chinese examples are legit. Though the example on the far
| right (Chong Lang ) is a word comprises of two characters,
| which means surfing only when the word is read as a whole.
|
| Also noted that that is simplified Chinese, used by mainland
| China, that is, well, simpler than traditional Chinese used in
| Taiwan and maybe Hong Kong. For instance, Chong Lang is
| written as Chong Lang in traditional Chinese, which is more
| complicated and I'm wondering how they handle it.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| Cool, thanks for the info.
| elil17 wrote:
| (Not a native Chinese speaker). Tu /rabbit is marginal to me -
| I don't think I would even register it as a character unless it
| was in the right context. The others are perfectly legible. For
| the bold-face Mao /cat (the first one), you do technically lose
| some "content carrying form" as the Tian becomes a shape that
| does not appear in Chinese (sideways Yue ), but I don't think
| that would actually confuse anyone in the context of the rest
| of the character.
| enoch2090 wrote:
| Native Chinese speaker here. All transformations seem legit to
| me, the Tu /rabbit one was especially good since it is
| beautifully transformed, and I would say it still readable for
| a native speaker. For the Mao /cat and Chong Lang /surfing
| cases, I feel like the transformation is too intentional, or
| less natural compared to the other cases (including the English
| ones). They are more readable though than Tu /rabbit.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-03-06 23:00 UTC)