4 ms·

I fail to see how this is ASCII art. ASCII didn't even exist before 1934. A more appropriate title might be Typewriter Art.

• mindstab 17y ago
  Lots of forms of art don't get a genera name until after they've started ;). Just because the first "cubist" painting came before the term got coined doesn't mean it isn't a cubist painting. And just because this showed up a few decades before ASCII itself was hammered out doesn't mean we all don't know exactly what it is when it's described as ASCII art.
  • Luyt 17y ago
    It is also reminiscent of an embroidering pattern.
    • allenp 17y ago
      I agree - I think this is more a cross-stitch pattern than ascii art - especially since it only uses one character (X). It is however quite fancy, and I do appreciate the time it would have taken to produce it.
      • zandorg 17y ago
        I imagine you could just trace over an existing picture then type X's over the tracing paper, with a typewriter.
        • eru 17y ago
          You still need a monochrome [0] picture that looks good at low resolution. [0] Or rather bichrome.
    • Luyt 17y ago
      Apparently as early as the medieval times people recorded reference embroidery patterns and examples, see this cloth with an assortment of different building blocks: http://home.comcast.net/~mathilde/embroidery/gallery/va0782-054.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~mathilde/embroidery/gallery/va0782-...
  • Semiapies 17y ago
    For that matter, it's not "ASCII art" because it's encoded that way (as opposed to "UTF-16 art"), it's because it's made up of text characters in a grid. This certainly counts.
• malkia 17y ago
  Was Jesus Christian, and were Neandertahls from Neandertahl, and so and so...
  • eru 17y ago
    (The h in `Neandertahl' isn't quite right.)