This is neat for small flash pieces. I’m not sure I want to imagine the process for getting a half sleeve of one’s own design applied this way, fifteen millimeter diameter at a time.
Alignment would be impossible, which would constrain the design. You could achieve a decent floral pattern, but you'd need to forego any vines. Celtic knots are out.
Presumably larger prints will arrive, but you still have the trouble of mapping to a non-euclidean surface. Unless of course you're tattooing Euclid.
Are you suggesting that tattoos are uglifying the world or that an innovation like this device is? I am no defender of capitalism but I don't see the connection.
Neat concept, but the density of needles seems quite low for tattoing, and that is likely why the linework of the tattoos in those pictures is so blurry. While getting tattooed, the needle will puncture skin and deposit ink typically 1500+ times per minute. The most specific that this article gets is saying the patches have "hundreds" of needles. At the high end (999 needles in a patch) this means that this patch has substantially lower resolution than a single minute of being tattooed.
So, it's a neat gimmick, but it'll need a lot of work to be much more than that. It'd be neat for some small pieces to fill space I guess.
And a bit of a tangent, but I also have a pretty strong needle aversion, and I have not found that getting tattooed "feels" like there are any needles involved in the process. I know logically that it is a needle, but subjective process (the pain and visuals) really bears no resemblance to a needle.
Makes you wonder why; if we can cut steel in half with water, would it be possible to deliver ink to a specified depth with high pressure “ink needles” (microscopic high pressure short burst of liquid ink)? Like a super high pressure inkjet printer.
Though, I assume a more practical point might be a robot that would have an ink-feeding extremely fast cycling device for doing tattoos that can complete them in a fraction of the time. Would suck for artists if you could just AI design your tattoo and have it done in minutes by a robot that can sense your movements and reactions and adjust in real time.
Are tattoos normally considered painful? I got my first one recently (a small shoulder tattoo) and it didn't hurt really, more like a cat's tongue rasping against the skin. I have heard my artist has a light touch, and it wasn't a very sensitive area.
In my experience, as others have said, the shoulder is probably the least painful area to get tattooed, to the point where I also wouldn't call it painful. I'm halfway through one right now which runs from my chest/armpit over my shoulder and upper arm, and onto my back, and the shoulder was the only real reprieve. The armpit, chest, arm, and back (in that order) were certainly painful to varying degrees, even if they were tolerable.
I also got one not long ago, a round dial about 3 inches across, on my quads a few inches above my knee that was exceedingly painful, an area where the pain charts seem to suggest is not usually painful.
The most painful for me is when when the outline is done and they go back to do the shading/texturing and the skin is already angry. That's a good time to stop if the tattoo is sufficiently large.
Unless they’re also coming out with painless permanent tattoo removal as well, this seems like one of those things where removing the friction isn’t actually a good thing. Door knobs and warning signs on one way doors are a design feature, not a bug.
The friction exists vastly unevenly. Some people are so scared of needles that they couldn't possibly get a tattoo recreationally, some people don't give af and get them with no thought at all.
The current scheme is not optimally applying friction where it belongs so there's a lot of room for improvement.
20 comments
[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 13.5 ms ] threadPresumably larger prints will arrive, but you still have the trouble of mapping to a non-euclidean surface. Unless of course you're tattooing Euclid.
Obviously doesn’t really make sense because if it’s an ad you also know who did it but somehow that’s the first thing that came to mind for me.
> Applied with a handheld tool, the patch stays on the skin for around 10 to 15 minutes
You'd notice.
So, it's a neat gimmick, but it'll need a lot of work to be much more than that. It'd be neat for some small pieces to fill space I guess.
And a bit of a tangent, but I also have a pretty strong needle aversion, and I have not found that getting tattooed "feels" like there are any needles involved in the process. I know logically that it is a needle, but subjective process (the pain and visuals) really bears no resemblance to a needle.
Though, I assume a more practical point might be a robot that would have an ink-feeding extremely fast cycling device for doing tattoos that can complete them in a fraction of the time. Would suck for artists if you could just AI design your tattoo and have it done in minutes by a robot that can sense your movements and reactions and adjust in real time.
https://mocagh.org/broderbund/printshop-refcard.pdf
I also got one not long ago, a round dial about 3 inches across, on my quads a few inches above my knee that was exceedingly painful, an area where the pain charts seem to suggest is not usually painful.
The most painful for me is when when the outline is done and they go back to do the shading/texturing and the skin is already angry. That's a good time to stop if the tattoo is sufficiently large.
The current scheme is not optimally applying friction where it belongs so there's a lot of room for improvement.