E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSwiss light artist Gerry Hofstetter projected pictures of the Titanic on a giant iceberg off Greenland to mark the 100th anniversary of its maiden voyage.
Mike Kessler / Gerry Hofstetter Marketing via EPA
A light projection of the Titanic on a 500-meter-long iceberg in the Northern Polar sea of Greenland, during the night of 13 April 2012.
Swiss artist Gerry Hofstetter is one of the best-known light artists working today. He uses light to project huge images in unexpected places, like a cross on the famous Matterhorn peak in the Alps, and hieroglyphics on the outside of the pyramids in Giza. His projects transform monuments, buildings and landscapes into something new. Sometimes his work has a serious tone, as when he projected polar bears on melting glaciers, but he also does fun lightshows for clients for events such as festivals and openings. His goal is to illuminate each of the world’s greatest monuments and sacred places.
See more of Hofstetter’s work on his website.
Related content:
- National Geographic features new images of the unseen Titanic
- Ship sets sail to commemorate Titanic's voyage
- Titanic memorial cruise diverts due to medical emergency
Hulton Archives / Getty Images; AFP - Getty Images
A look at the memorials, museum exhibits and memorabilia that commemorate the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic, including the photos from 1912 that capture the anticipation and the aftermath around this "unsinkable" ship.
One century after the Titanic sank during its maiden voyage, the historic day is being commemorated around the world. NBC's Stephanie Gosk reports.
David Moir / Reuters
The Titanic Belfast Experience is a new visitor attraction location in Belfast's Titanic Quarter, on the original site of the Harland and Wolff shipyard - birthplace of RMS Titanic.
Leave a Comment:
Oh, I just love Hofstetter's work!!
Reminds me of my Grandpa Sven when he forgot to put the plug in the bottom of his 8ft rowboat up at Sugar Lake. The wind was howling, the waves were lashing at the sides of the boat, the water was pouring in and he stood on the center seat with a bottle of Schlitz beer in his left hand and waved goodbye to us all. Grandama was hollering to Sven to get out of the boat, but no, the captain of the boat went down with his boat. The boat was still tied to the dock and the water was only 3 feet deep, but nonethe less, he showed great courage in the face of danger. Oh...the humanity!
Starsailing, would that be Sugar lake in the Monoshees, BC? That lake is about as cold as the Atlantic.
I have to say, that is very impressive! Wish I could have been there to see it! (the art, not the disaster, lol)
Very cool light show!!!
I think that the Iceberg has a secret base in the center of it where terrorists are going to use it to launch secret attacks against countries that it might pass close by to. Once it melts the base will sink to the bottom of the ocean never having known to have existed.
I thought the same thing.
Reminds me of a Clive Cussler book that I read years ago...very interesting.
My grandma was 24 years old when the Titanic sank. She could never talk about it, it upset her very much if we asked her about those days. She was just an average person in 1914, she didn't have any direct connection to anyone aboard the ship.
The photos are very cool, just like the iceberg!
Doesn't that picture above look like a 'ghost ship'? I agree, very cool.
It's a good thing that the media was told the picture was a projection. Otherwise the headlines from NBC would be Titanic Raise from the Ocean Floor! Hey, they ain't the brightest bulbs in the lamps.
Just out of curiousity, who is stupider...NBC for printing news you don't agree with, or you for following closely on information you claim is of no value?
NBC for editing the Zimmerman 911 call!
Buffaloes Roam: No such word as stupider. Should have been worded: "who is more stupid. . . .". Not: "who is stupider". Just a little constructive criticism.
That would put you at the same wattage as well. You're here lapping it up like a thirsty dog.
Your humor wouldn't even rate a 1 on a scale from 0-1.
And to bring up Zimmerman? Just sad.
stupid (comparative stupider or more stupid, superlative stupidest or most stupid) ... No sigh to rise, no tear had pow'r to flow, Fix'd in a stupid lethargy of woe.
Although you would have been entirely correct in 1930, A Taylor.
A human tragedy of the utmost proportions. May all those who died that fateful night continue to Rest in Peace.
LIKE. More environmentally friendly than Christo's.
What a beautiful piece of art in a very eirey (sp) way. I would have lovet to see that.
If this is supposed to be the iceberg Titanic hit the ship is facing the wrong direction.
Destination: Thank you for making that observation first. One, it does look like it's heading to the East, and two, the wrong side of the ship is facing the iceberg. As I remember, It struck on the right (starboard) side of the bow. Just as a (probably very) trivial point of information, "iceberg" is an anglicized spelling of the German "Eisberg" (spelling?) which translates "ice mountain." Perhaps useless, but I think interesting.
That was the first thing I'd noticed as well. Wrong side or direction.
". . . it does look like it's heading to the East."
That totally depends on the artwork's orientation, and thus the photographer's perspective. If the image is being projected on the north side of the iceburg, the ship is pointed west, not east as you presume.
It's a nice idea, but it's historically inaccurate in at least two ways: 1) The sky was completely clear that night, so the snow/sleet/rain effect is wrong. 2) The ship should have its lights on; they stayed on until just before the Titanic sank, so they surely would be on when it is shown floating normally. Such carelessness with a major historic event is not acceptable, in "art" or anything else.
It's a work of art, not a reproduction of the actual sinking. Regarding the lights being on, I'm sure there were no photographs taken of the entire Titanic with it's lights on. The amount of exposure needed back then would have created a completely blurred image. I kind of like the effect of the darkened ship, haven't you ever heard of artistic license?
Perhaps Thomas Kinkade is a little more your speed.
Thomas Kinkead has no speed now.....Too soon?
Didn't realize an artist had to be historically accurate. I thought he was free to do whatever he wanted, hence being an "artist".
Diana, you're a moron. LOL.
I may be wrong, just guessing here - but I think it's possible the snow/sleet/rain effect perhaps IS rain reflecting the lights being used to project the image. It doesn't have the same light quality as the image of the ship, so I don't think it's an intentional part of the piece.
And if you're going to be so picky about this, I wonder how you feel about Picasso's work?
Picasso was the greatest painter of the 20th Century. Duchamp was the greatest intellectual artist of the time. And some still consider Duchamp's "Nude Descending a Staircase" to be the greatest abstract painting of the era.
HELLOOOOO!! Have you ever made an appointment in advance and have things go wrong?? Maybe he set this up, paid in advance (as most contractors require) and the weather just didn't cooperate? The point may have been only to get the image itself and nothing else. I think its awesome either way.
I heard about the Indian and Japanese tsunamis less than I hear about this damn boat I think.
Broaden your search criteria. I could get over 1 million hits about the Tsunami in less than 10 seconds.
EDIT: I actually got over 10 million hits in less than 5 seconds.
Look at those 3rd Class ticket prices! I can't even fill up my gas tank for that price anymore!
But $36.25 in 1912 is $880 in 2012 dollars. Third class on the Titanic was thus considerably more than economy airfare today.
I thought the same thing... Money back then had ALOT more value. Today it's practically worthless..
You also get paid much much more now than you would have then!
We may get paid more, but it's really not worth a lot more!
RevSpinnaker, it isn't necessary to find a photo of the Titanic with its lights on -- the "artist" here claims light as his medium! The dark ship is just depressing. As for the Kinkade remark, this type of hiding-behind-Internet-anonymity remark in order to be rude without consequences is duly noted in regard to your character.
The artist used a light projection. I would guess that means it is something akin to using a slide projector (on a BIG scale). Thus, unless the artist has a way to "paint" lights onto the projected picture of the Titanic, it would appear dark - kind of a ghost ship as someone else here had stated.
"Some survivors of the Titanic were interviewed and told by the media that certain things that they say that they saw never happened. One elderly woman who made it said..."How do YOU know what happened? I didn't see you there!" Good for her!
Probably the most elegant and tastefull commemoration of this tragedy I've seen. Much more so than over priced cruises and 3D movies.
looks like they made this in a back lot of a film studio, at least they could have used a real iceburg. I've never seen one with a near perfect vertical edge like you see at the right of the picture. would have been better if they had done it in cg. o-well
I would've loved to see this - 500 meters is roughly twice as long as the ship itself. I think she was around 250-300. Could be wrong. I'm just wondering how tall that picture is on the berg. Oh, and how far away the berg is from the Remembrance Cruise.
I'm sure the artist meant for the image to be dark and depressing as it commemorates a very dark and depressing event. As someone else pointed out, this is NOT a re-creation of what happened. Its symbolic. Nuff said.
God Himself cannot sink this ship. Arpil 15, 1912
my question today..is why didnt they have enought life boats
They didn't have enough life boats because some dim-wit architect-designer or someone else at White Star thought the Titanic looked ugly with the additional boats. Plus, there weren't that many laws or regulations for sea ferrying vessels.
Actually it wasn't the designer/architect who left off the extra life boats. It was Bruce Ismay and the higher ups at White Star Line. Andrews designed a new type davit that would include another row of boats inside the existing ones...
The reason that there were so few lifeboats on Titanic, if anyone watched the history channed 100 year story is because they weren't intended to take everyone off the boat and float off on their own power to safety. The intent of the lifeboats was to ferry the passengers to another awaiting ship that had come to their aide.
This is a great picture of the titanic
This is bone-chilling.
Kinda of eery but fasinating But at the same time sad for the many people that lost their lives that night long long time ago.
quit argueing, it's all GEORGE bush's fault- end of story
if 1+1=2,and 2+1=3, then what does 3+1=--------oil