What is the Image Fulgurator and What Does it Mean for the Future of Advertising?

If you haven’t already heard of Julius von Bismarck’s Image Fulgurator, then welcome to the internet. According to his website, it’s a “device for physically manipulating photographs”.

But what does it do? How does it manipulate? And what the hell is a Fulgurator? Well, it comes from the Latin word for ‘lightning’ – fulgur. Fulguration means the act or process of flashing like lightning. And the name fits. It’s essentially a projector that senses the flash of a camera, then quickly projects an image onto the object being photographed for a split second. The whole action is invisible to the naked eye, and results in a photograph with some image or text added.

It’s an ingenious device with endless possibilities. So it’s only a matter of time before this technology starts getting integrated into mainstream advertising. Von Bismark has a patent on the device, but this is fairly simple technology; a projector + a flash detector; there will be ways around it I’m sure. Or he may just sell the rights to his invention outright when the absurdly large offers start coming in. Either way, it can’t be a bad thing.

Every blog entry and article on the Internet talking about this device is worried about the inevitable advertising use, hoping it doesn’t “fall into the wrong hands”. But really, let’s look at the big picture. We live in a world now where photography is under fire; there are signs up all over the UK asking citizens to “fight terrorism by reporting suspicious photographers”. I was recently hassled while walking around taking random pictures in Center City Philadelphia. You could get arrested and put on a no fly list for taking pictures in an airport. The masses of authority freaks are obviously skittish about picture takers; and the best way to reverse that trend is to get business to embrace photography; and the best way to do that is to make it profitable.

Imagine a world where businesses specifically try to create the most photogenic environment and encourage photography, simply because there are advertisements waiting to flicker their way onto your camera. And what about museums, who are usually at least partially hostile to photographers, if they don’t ban them outright? This could offer them an incentive to allow photography without any restrictions and give them an alternative source of income. More money for museums is a good thing. Really, the positive aspects of this device are there, if only you can open your mind past the generic idea of “Advertising bad”. But let’s hear what you think. Good, bad, ugly? How do you feel about the Image Fulgurator falling into the hands of the advertising world?