<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is this how the Escher Waterfall machine&#160;works?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html</link>
	<description>Brain candy for Happy Mutants</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 19:15:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1043972</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1043972</guid>
		<description>Only the water is CGI.  The model is real.  If you watch when he is pouring the water into the box just below the wheel, you can see the flow doesn&#039;t match how much is being poured.  Then, as the water travels around the right angles, it flows all even and smooth.  It would he the right angle hard and you would get a lot of splashing.  It&#039;s not bad, but it reminds me of CGI from the 90s where as opposed to the modern day stuff.  

Now go back to dreaming about unicorns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Only the water is CGI.  The model is real.  If you watch when he is pouring the water into the box just below the wheel, you can see the flow doesn&#8217;t match how much is being poured.  Then, as the water travels around the right angles, it flows all even and smooth.  It would he the right angle hard and you would get a lot of splashing.  It&#8217;s not bad, but it reminds me of CGI from the 90s where as opposed to the modern day stuff.  </p>
<p>Now go back to dreaming about unicorns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheekus</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031174</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheekus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031174</guid>
		<description>beautiful I always love how Escher expands our mind&#039;s of what&#039;s both possible and contradictory. It&#039;s like seeing both flatland and 3d at same time. 

speaking of mind expansion by cognition: 
I wrote recently a post that&#039;s on a similar theme, titled &quot;how to have eternity in an hour&quot;
http://www.cybernoeticman.com/2011/02/how-to-have-eternity-in-hour-in-5-easy.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>beautiful I always love how Escher expands our mind&#8217;s of what&#8217;s both possible and contradictory. It&#8217;s like seeing both flatland and 3d at same time. </p>
<p>speaking of mind expansion by cognition:<br />
I wrote recently a post that&#8217;s on a similar theme, titled &#8220;how to have eternity in an hour&#8221;<br />
<a href="http://www.cybernoeticman.com/2011/02/how-to-have-eternity-in-hour-in-5-easy.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cybernoeticman.com/2011/02/how-to-have-eternity-in-hour-in-5-easy.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1043974</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1043974</guid>
		<description>Oh, and the waterwheel is on a motor so it starts spinning at his control.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and the waterwheel is on a motor so it starts spinning at his control.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031183</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031183</guid>
		<description>Like my 9 year old daughter said the other day:

&quot;It&#039;s amazing that no one has ever done anything impossible!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like my 9 year old daughter said the other day:</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s amazing that no one has ever done anything impossible!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: irksome</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031195</link>
		<dc:creator>irksome</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031195</guid>
		<description>I STILL say &quot;God dunnit&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I STILL say &#8220;God dunnit&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KrÃ¼zÎµr Î¦Î˜Î©Î´âˆž</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1032221</link>
		<dc:creator>KrÃ¼zÎµr Î¦Î˜Î©Î´âˆž</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1032221</guid>
		<description>Sneaky bastard.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sneaky bastard.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031457</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031457</guid>
		<description>The diagram that David Goldman presents looks quite different from what we see in the original video; I overcolored it , see at
http://mennucc1.debian.net/escher_not_solved.jpg :
I colored red some pieces that do not appear in the original, and green a piece that is instead missing (and is not the only one). So in my opinion David Goldman really got it wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The diagram that David Goldman presents looks quite different from what we see in the original video; I overcolored it , see at<br />
<a href="http://mennucc1.debian.net/escher_not_solved.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://mennucc1.debian.net/escher_not_solved.jpg</a> :<br />
I colored red some pieces that do not appear in the original, and green a piece that is instead missing (and is not the only one). So in my opinion David Goldman really got it wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EeyoreX</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031461</link>
		<dc:creator>EeyoreX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031461</guid>
		<description>&lt;I&gt;&quot;I think that entire ground of the room is sloping up... Also, the inclining floor allows space for the bridge&lt;/I&gt;

So, in effect, what youÂ´re saying is that the water actually flows upwards and creates an infinite loop, that this machine bends the laws of physics and that weÂ´re back at square one.
And you even took the time to alter the drawing to illustrate this point?

I&#039;m afraid there&#039;s no polite way to say this: You, sir, are an idiot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;I think that entire ground of the room is sloping up&#8230; Also, the inclining floor allows space for the bridge</i></p>
<p>So, in effect, what youÂ´re saying is that the water actually flows upwards and creates an infinite loop, that this machine bends the laws of physics and that weÂ´re back at square one.<br />
And you even took the time to alter the drawing to illustrate this point?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid there&#8217;s no polite way to say this: You, sir, are an idiot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031463</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031463</guid>
		<description>@Anon#1. No I don&#039;t think it&#039;s CGI.. where&#039;s the cleverness in that? It would just be too damn easy to do this as CGI in post-production these days. No, this is a clever piece of forced perspective, enough to even fool some into thinking it is just CGI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Anon#1. No I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s CGI.. where&#8217;s the cleverness in that? It would just be too damn easy to do this as CGI in post-production these days. No, this is a clever piece of forced perspective, enough to even fool some into thinking it is just CGI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031469</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031469</guid>
		<description>I call this design tinyurl.com/65d24qw since shadows and reflexes are coherent, then he poured water on each level and composited all together. He spoils it by showing us the two big buckets full of coloured water: why so much if he has a perpetual waterfall that to function needs just the waterï»¿ in the blue jug? He needed to pour lots of water on each level to obtain a constant and long enough flow that looked convincing once composited. Nice, well done!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I call this design tinyurl.com/65d24qw since shadows and reflexes are coherent, then he poured water on each level and composited all together. He spoils it by showing us the two big buckets full of coloured water: why so much if he has a perpetual waterfall that to function needs just the waterï»¿ in the blue jug? He needed to pour lots of water on each level to obtain a constant and long enough flow that looked convincing once composited. Nice, well done!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EeyoreX</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031214</link>
		<dc:creator>EeyoreX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031214</guid>
		<description>Um, the pillar supporting (A) doesn&#039;t appear that way at all in the video. In fact that pillar is part of the optical illusion and probably doesn&#039;t even exist as such.

So this may be the correct scematics for how this trick is created, but it doesn&#039;t work out any of the details, like balance or support or perspective or such.

(B) is just redundant btw. Somebody go get Occhams shaving tools.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um, the pillar supporting (A) doesn&#8217;t appear that way at all in the video. In fact that pillar is part of the optical illusion and probably doesn&#8217;t even exist as such.</p>
<p>So this may be the correct scematics for how this trick is created, but it doesn&#8217;t work out any of the details, like balance or support or perspective or such.</p>
<p>(B) is just redundant btw. Somebody go get Occhams shaving tools.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucienz</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1044790</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucienz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1044790</guid>
		<description>Hey, great post on the most possible solution!
I did have to comment on the &quot;itâ€™s probably CG because that would be easy&quot; side of things.
Creating an accurate fluid dynamic animation that looks real, with all the imperfections in reality, is actually very difficult. 
Also, if the creator of this is good enough to make something of that quality there is no reason for the camera to be locked down. If he had the model, lighting, texturing, and shadow motions in 3D he could have done a handheld video moving around the thing without too much more effort that would have added to the realism.
In short, not 3D. All speaks to the solution given: Two shots masked and comped in a 2D operation in post (bunch of reasons why the â€œpumpâ€ solution probably wouldnâ€™t work as well)

Second, I don&#039;t think anyone mentioned this but you can see that the &quot;leading&quot; edge is higher than the rest of the trough and it all flows downhill.  If you look at the pour point you can see that the bottom of the trough is not on the ground.  The further along the track you follow the thinner the whole device gets.  Itâ€™s a uniform trough and side walls made at an angle to fool the eye.

Look at the explanation 3D model, imagine it tilted down then watch the video again.  You can see it.

Anyways, amazing practical trick shot on the video and great work again on the solution!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, great post on the most possible solution!<br />
I did have to comment on the &#8220;itâ€™s probably CG because that would be easy&#8221; side of things.<br />
Creating an accurate fluid dynamic animation that looks real, with all the imperfections in reality, is actually very difficult.<br />
Also, if the creator of this is good enough to make something of that quality there is no reason for the camera to be locked down. If he had the model, lighting, texturing, and shadow motions in 3D he could have done a handheld video moving around the thing without too much more effort that would have added to the realism.<br />
In short, not 3D. All speaks to the solution given: Two shots masked and comped in a 2D operation in post (bunch of reasons why the â€œpumpâ€ solution probably wouldnâ€™t work as well)</p>
<p>Second, I don&#8217;t think anyone mentioned this but you can see that the &#8220;leading&#8221; edge is higher than the rest of the trough and it all flows downhill.  If you look at the pour point you can see that the bottom of the trough is not on the ground.  The further along the track you follow the thinner the whole device gets.  Itâ€™s a uniform trough and side walls made at an angle to fool the eye.</p>
<p>Look at the explanation 3D model, imagine it tilted down then watch the video again.  You can see it.</p>
<p>Anyways, amazing practical trick shot on the video and great work again on the solution!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1043767</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1043767</guid>
		<description>Just look at the video in 1080p. You can clearly see the splitline where the two video takes are joined. Look at the &quot;roof&quot; of the tallest tower - the one above the waterfall&#039;s edge.

Yes, there seem to be artifacts of post-processing, faking some shadows etc, but this is a wood model and the water flow was shot in two takes, one for the left side of the model with a bucket on the right, and the other way round.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just look at the video in 1080p. You can clearly see the splitline where the two video takes are joined. Look at the &#8220;roof&#8221; of the tallest tower &#8211; the one above the waterfall&#8217;s edge.</p>
<p>Yes, there seem to be artifacts of post-processing, faking some shadows etc, but this is a wood model and the water flow was shot in two takes, one for the left side of the model with a bucket on the right, and the other way round.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1030977</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1030977</guid>
		<description>Or it is CGI...the wood is just too brightly lit.  And considering it looks to be unprotected pine, it would have instantly have started soaking up the water and darkening.

Everything in that shot is dirty, dark and wet...except the waterfall which seems to have the most amazing and perfect lighting.  And nothing else reflects in the water on the floor quite as nicely.  Wierd...to get it this lit, I would expect to see lights in the water too.  

It would be awesome if this were anything more than CGI...and it would be possible to make an illusion that looked like this...but it ain&#039;t it.  Actually, part of the fun of these sorts of things is to see how someone did it...and unfortunately, this is too easy.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or it is CGI&#8230;the wood is just too brightly lit.  And considering it looks to be unprotected pine, it would have instantly have started soaking up the water and darkening.</p>
<p>Everything in that shot is dirty, dark and wet&#8230;except the waterfall which seems to have the most amazing and perfect lighting.  And nothing else reflects in the water on the floor quite as nicely.  Wierd&#8230;to get it this lit, I would expect to see lights in the water too.  </p>
<p>It would be awesome if this were anything more than CGI&#8230;and it would be possible to make an illusion that looked like this&#8230;but it ain&#8217;t it.  Actually, part of the fun of these sorts of things is to see how someone did it&#8230;and unfortunately, this is too easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: millrick</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1030978</link>
		<dc:creator>millrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1030978</guid>
		<description>damn you, Boing Boing, for destroying my delusions
 - i LIKE to believe in impossibile things</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>damn you, Boing Boing, for destroying my delusions<br />
 &#8211; i LIKE to believe in impossibile things</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: subhan</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031239</link>
		<dc:creator>subhan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031239</guid>
		<description>@#1 - the scene is very brightly lit because I believe it to be clever forced perspective filming.  It requires a very small aperture to get large depth of field, and thus needs very brightly lit scenes.  For a masterpiece of this kind of work watch Darby O&#039;Gill &amp; The Little People.  They nearly cooked the actors to death during the filming of some of the scenes with the intense lighting used.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@#1 &#8211; the scene is very brightly lit because I believe it to be clever forced perspective filming.  It requires a very small aperture to get large depth of field, and thus needs very brightly lit scenes.  For a masterpiece of this kind of work watch Darby O&#8217;Gill &#038; The Little People.  They nearly cooked the actors to death during the filming of some of the scenes with the intense lighting used.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1043278</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1043278</guid>
		<description>Here is my explanation-- a combination of CGI, illusion, and trickery:

1. The woodwork is real in the sense that he did construct something that from the right angle only LOOKS like the Escher&#039;s waterfall. However, I don&#039;t believe the waters runs through it in real life. This is where the CGI comes in.

2. When he pours the water, the water escapes through an exit right after the trough (hidden by the water wheel).

3. The illusion part of the video, which is water going uphill to the waterfall is done in CGI, and it&#039;s very easy to do so. Simulating water flow upwards with CGI in straight lines is CGI 101.

4. And lastly the water dropping from the fall onto the wheel is real. This is the trick part. I believe he has a tube going up to the fall portion (obstructed inside or behind the inside column), and he probably  triggers this with his free hand since he&#039;s mostly outside of the camera view. It could also be started by someone else in the room, that part is irrelevant.

Anyhow, that&#039;s my theory and if you can agree that Escher&#039;s waterfall can be built to appear as such from a specific point of view (without running it, just as a still image), the rest I assure you is possible. Points 2-4 are 100% feasible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is my explanation&#8211; a combination of CGI, illusion, and trickery:</p>
<p>1. The woodwork is real in the sense that he did construct something that from the right angle only LOOKS like the Escher&#8217;s waterfall. However, I don&#8217;t believe the waters runs through it in real life. This is where the CGI comes in.</p>
<p>2. When he pours the water, the water escapes through an exit right after the trough (hidden by the water wheel).</p>
<p>3. The illusion part of the video, which is water going uphill to the waterfall is done in CGI, and it&#8217;s very easy to do so. Simulating water flow upwards with CGI in straight lines is CGI 101.</p>
<p>4. And lastly the water dropping from the fall onto the wheel is real. This is the trick part. I believe he has a tube going up to the fall portion (obstructed inside or behind the inside column), and he probably  triggers this with his free hand since he&#8217;s mostly outside of the camera view. It could also be started by someone else in the room, that part is irrelevant.</p>
<p>Anyhow, that&#8217;s my theory and if you can agree that Escher&#8217;s waterfall can be built to appear as such from a specific point of view (without running it, just as a still image), the rest I assure you is possible. Points 2-4 are 100% feasible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1044319</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1044319</guid>
		<description>you can see the unit is above the ground it is suspended or lifted</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you can see the unit is above the ground it is suspended or lifted</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdrenalineSleep</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031011</link>
		<dc:creator>AdrenalineSleep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031011</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d like to see someone use THIS model to do the same trick to see if the result in fact replicates the video. 

I tried to study the movements in the video and kept pausing as he walked past the thing thinking that the shadows would help reveal the illusion but i just couldn&#039;t get my head around it. This is awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d like to see someone use THIS model to do the same trick to see if the result in fact replicates the video. </p>
<p>I tried to study the movements in the video and kept pausing as he walked past the thing thinking that the shadows would help reveal the illusion but i just couldn&#8217;t get my head around it. This is awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031779</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031779</guid>
		<description>If that is an electrolyte solution he is pouring in there, it could complete a circuit to turn the pump on at just the right time.  
That would be more elegant than leaving the pump running anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If that is an electrolyte solution he is pouring in there, it could complete a circuit to turn the pump on at just the right time.<br />
That would be more elegant than leaving the pump running anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dmatos</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031018</link>
		<dc:creator>dmatos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031018</guid>
		<description>That pretty much matches up with my opinion of where the break in the real model is.  However, I don&#039;t think the video was necessarily done in two cuts.  If there is a reservoir and a pump underneath the floor-level track, it would be fairly trivial to hide a tube running from that reservoir up to point A on the above diagram.  Water falling off the end of point C could be collected by the reservoir.

The tricky part would be timing starting the pump, so that the C-&gt;A transition is as tidy as possible.  He did a great job, but there is some inconsistency in the water flow at ~0:45 in the video.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That pretty much matches up with my opinion of where the break in the real model is.  However, I don&#8217;t think the video was necessarily done in two cuts.  If there is a reservoir and a pump underneath the floor-level track, it would be fairly trivial to hide a tube running from that reservoir up to point A on the above diagram.  Water falling off the end of point C could be collected by the reservoir.</p>
<p>The tricky part would be timing starting the pump, so that the C->A transition is as tidy as possible.  He did a great job, but there is some inconsistency in the water flow at ~0:45 in the video.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bodenski</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031020</link>
		<dc:creator>bodenski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031020</guid>
		<description>When thinking about HOW one would easiest make this illusion, I thought it COULD be as depicted here, OR COULD have the slices marked A and E   attached to C and the water pipe hidden behind the upright and come out at the corner.    
I think the video looks great!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When thinking about HOW one would easiest make this illusion, I thought it COULD be as depicted here, OR COULD have the slices marked A and E   attached to C and the water pipe hidden behind the upright and come out at the corner.<br />
I think the video looks great!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cunning</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031027</link>
		<dc:creator>Cunning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031027</guid>
		<description>oops? Hardly.  Mcwolles&#039; waterfall is truly epic and nearly flawless. The fact that he didn&#039;t sweat a few environmental giveaways bespeaks a certain humility if you ask me. It&#039;s all about the project, not the presentation. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oops? Hardly.  Mcwolles&#8217; waterfall is truly epic and nearly flawless. The fact that he didn&#8217;t sweat a few environmental giveaways bespeaks a certain humility if you ask me. It&#8217;s all about the project, not the presentation. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gavintree</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1032053</link>
		<dc:creator>gavintree</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1032053</guid>
		<description>I am sort of upset with david and all the rest of you. Listen, he is obviously making the water flow uphill. I watched the video and the water clearly is poured in at the bottom and runs up to the water fall and then cascades back down to the bottom. The paranoia being exhibited on this thread is terrifying.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am sort of upset with david and all the rest of you. Listen, he is obviously making the water flow uphill. I watched the video and the water clearly is poured in at the bottom and runs up to the water fall and then cascades back down to the bottom. The paranoia being exhibited on this thread is terrifying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pjk</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031030</link>
		<dc:creator>pjk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031030</guid>
		<description>nice, two thumbs up. the guy who made this had to have known that the most fun part of these things is figuring out how he did it. thanks for the treasure hunt!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice, two thumbs up. the guy who made this had to have known that the most fun part of these things is figuring out how he did it. thanks for the treasure hunt!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: asbuuu</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031032</link>
		<dc:creator>asbuuu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031032</guid>
		<description>I agree the most likely way he did it was by cutting the water flow behind one of the pillars. It doesn&#039;t have to be &#039;C&#039; as suggested. I don&#039;t see any noticeable time delay there.

Also, you can see the water appear in segment &#039;B&#039; for a brief second, and the reflection of the water is always apparent, so I do think it&#039;s attached to the main track.

It is mind boggling how well he did this (if he did). Remember, in order to get forced perspective looking right, lines we assume are parallel have to be cut at very precise, non-parallel angles. To work with wood in this way would be extremely difficult. So either he&#039;s a master wood cutter and illusionist, or perhaps this whole thing was done with rather simple tricks in &#039;post-production.&#039; I just don&#039;t know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree the most likely way he did it was by cutting the water flow behind one of the pillars. It doesn&#8217;t have to be &#8216;C&#8217; as suggested. I don&#8217;t see any noticeable time delay there.</p>
<p>Also, you can see the water appear in segment &#8216;B&#8217; for a brief second, and the reflection of the water is always apparent, so I do think it&#8217;s attached to the main track.</p>
<p>It is mind boggling how well he did this (if he did). Remember, in order to get forced perspective looking right, lines we assume are parallel have to be cut at very precise, non-parallel angles. To work with wood in this way would be extremely difficult. So either he&#8217;s a master wood cutter and illusionist, or perhaps this whole thing was done with rather simple tricks in &#8216;post-production.&#8217; I just don&#8217;t know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031035</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031035</guid>
		<description>Well this diagram is a little off IMHO.  The trough &quot;appears&quot; to enter the left tower BETWEEN the middle and right pillars, not from behind.  I think that the discontinuity in the water is hidden behind the middle pillar of the left tower, not the left pillar of the right tower.  Rather than a small triangle for the middle level of the left tower, the entire near edge of BOTH sections of trough where the water is flowing from right to left are attached to the left tower, as evidenced when his shadow passes over the near edges without darkening the surfaces of the trough.  (There must be a smaller near edge hidden from view  by the false near edge attached to the left tower) And, like dmatos, I don&#039;t think that there is a break in the film.  however it does look like there is more water spilling over the water wheel than is making it to the end of the trough.

And just to say it, talking how this was done DOESN&#039;T demean it, rather it is a teastamant to how engaging this little video is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well this diagram is a little off IMHO.  The trough &#8220;appears&#8221; to enter the left tower BETWEEN the middle and right pillars, not from behind.  I think that the discontinuity in the water is hidden behind the middle pillar of the left tower, not the left pillar of the right tower.  Rather than a small triangle for the middle level of the left tower, the entire near edge of BOTH sections of trough where the water is flowing from right to left are attached to the left tower, as evidenced when his shadow passes over the near edges without darkening the surfaces of the trough.  (There must be a smaller near edge hidden from view  by the false near edge attached to the left tower) And, like dmatos, I don&#8217;t think that there is a break in the film.  however it does look like there is more water spilling over the water wheel than is making it to the end of the trough.</p>
<p>And just to say it, talking how this was done DOESN&#8217;T demean it, rather it is a teastamant to how engaging this little video is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stalkingcat</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031040</link>
		<dc:creator>stalkingcat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031040</guid>
		<description>I really don&#039;t think there&#039;s a break anywhere in the video.

When he pours the blue water out of the reservoir bucket, the water starts swishing around, and stays consistently swishing throughout the entire video. If you just stare at the bucket, there&#039;s no apparent break.

David&#039;s diagram? Looks correct, but there&#039;s some kind of pump back at C.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s a break anywhere in the video.</p>
<p>When he pours the blue water out of the reservoir bucket, the water starts swishing around, and stays consistently swishing throughout the entire video. If you just stare at the bucket, there&#8217;s no apparent break.</p>
<p>David&#8217;s diagram? Looks correct, but there&#8217;s some kind of pump back at C.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031561</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031561</guid>
		<description>This proposed solution is too clever by half.  I don&#039;t think its all that complicated, with pumps and editing and such.  The only split in the design that needs to be carefully done is around the waterwheel which appears to be in the foreground, but to work hydrodynamically for this illusion, is probably &#039;really&#039; at the end of the trough, away from viewer.  The trick is to make it appear with foreshortening gimmickery to be &#039;in front&#039;.  No pumps, editing, CGI.  The simplest explanation is usually correct, nice trick!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This proposed solution is too clever by half.  I don&#8217;t think its all that complicated, with pumps and editing and such.  The only split in the design that needs to be carefully done is around the waterwheel which appears to be in the foreground, but to work hydrodynamically for this illusion, is probably &#8216;really&#8217; at the end of the trough, away from viewer.  The trick is to make it appear with foreshortening gimmickery to be &#8216;in front&#8217;.  No pumps, editing, CGI.  The simplest explanation is usually correct, nice trick!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scopeyPDX</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2011/02/18/is-this-how-the-esch.html#comment-1031055</link>
		<dc:creator>scopeyPDX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-1031055</guid>
		<description>If he were going to cut the video, it would have made it much easier if he&#039;d moved entirely out of the frame. There&#039;s got to be a pump somewhere, so no reason not to have a circular system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If he were going to cut the video, it would have made it much easier if he&#8217;d moved entirely out of the frame. There&#8217;s got to be a pump somewhere, so no reason not to have a circular system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
