Comments on: WEBSITE, GRAPHICALLY DECONSTRUCTED

By: In Theory » Art by numbers

In Theory » Art by numbers — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 02:46:06 +0000

[...] From the man that brought us Websites as Graphs, the code-based web art sweeping the blogosphere (I found it at PopStat), it’s One Thousand Paintings. And it’s genius. [...]

By: Joel

Joel — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 03:21:01 +0000

Finally a way for my blog to reach more Laser Floyd enthusiasts.

Heck – the graph was pretty cool sober.

By: Richard Harlos

Richard Harlos — Mon, 05 Jun 2006 03:00:30 +0000

I did my blog about a week ago and thought the graph was interesting, but not enough to blog about.

After seeing your output I compared it with mine and thought yours was ‘prettier’ so I wondered if I put my site in again what would happen…

It looks about the same as the previous week, but it organized itself a bit differently.

I haven’t put both graphs up on my blog but I liked my 2nd one better so I put that one up, if you’re at all curious/interested.

Weekend’s over now so hope you have a wonderful Monday!

By: CT

CT — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 19:24:48 +0000

I’d assumed this mapped out the entire website, not just the specific index page of the inputted URL. Thus my reference to the long tail.

I guess that’s not the case. Giving the treatment to MySpace.com yields a relatively modest graph, instead of the near-infinite branching if it tracked down every user subpage. I’m surprised this blog’s graph came out so dense, though; I didn’t think there was that much markup on the index page, even with the typical number of posts at any given time.

As such, the name of the applet is a bit misleading — instead of “Websites as Graphs”, it should be called “Webpage as Graph”, since that’s where it’s limiting the scan.

It’s still fun to look at, though.

By: CGHill

CGHill — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:44:49 +0000

Yeah, but you should see my front page.

By: adam

adam — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 12:56:44 +0000

CGHill -
it graphs the tags on your front page, not the depth of your site.

By: CGHill

CGHill — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 01:30:33 +0000

It’s an utterly beautiful concept, but I gave up on it after sixteen minutes of gaping wonderment. My own fault for having seven or eight thousand archive pages, no doubt.

By: adam

adam — Sun, 04 Jun 2006 00:22:08 +0000

you know this has absolutely zilch to do with the long tail, right?
that’s just some sarcasm i’m not getting, right?