# Talk:Droste effect

I think the Morton salt girl is sometimes shown in the same way. AnonMoos 14:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Douglas Hofstadter mentions the Morton salt girl, video feedback loops, mirrors-held-up-to-mirrors, and other similar phenomena as examples of a concept he elaborates on and calls a "strange loop," in his new book I am a Strange Loop. I think he may have gone into it in GEB as well, but I don't remember, and I don't remember if he mentioned the Droste effect by name. I humbly suggest someone who can authoritatively say what the difference is between a Hofstadterian strange loop and the Droste effect please edit this page, or merge them, or at least link them to each other in the "See also" section or SOMETHING.... as they are similar enough ideas. All I remember for certain is that a strange loop percieves itself, whereas video feedback and the Droste lady picture and the Morton girl pictures do not, but... yeah.
Katyism 15:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I hope that as a native speaker of Dutch I can provide the authority required: the Droste effect is the specific pictorial effect of having the picture appear within itself, in such a way that it appears infinitely often; so it is a particular type of strange loop. Rp (talk) 20:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion the Droste effect cannot be considered as a strange loop. Unlike the strange loop the Droste effect is not a 'closed' system; Since its self-reference is 'open' (i.e it has a starting point, the original image) we cannot say that its images are non-hierarchical (a clear prerequisite of a strange loop.) If we could move away as well as into the picture (as in many fractals) then, in my mind, it would constitute a strange loop. One could say that it suggests a strange loop at its iterative limit point but this is still not, strictly speaking, the same thing. It does not help that many of Douglas Hoftadter's examples do not fit into this criteria, but I think his books as a whole confirm my criterion. Am I making a false distinction? Any thoughts? Joel C. 220.240.138.169 (talk) 14:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Photos from a digg article
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshsommers/sets/72157594405604955/
Katyism 15:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

How does one pronounce Droste? Does the "e" drop? 139.179.137.233  —Preceding comment was added at 23:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC) 

The -e is not silent; the r is approximately the French one.  In all, it's roughly what your car says when you try to start it and the battery is dead. Rp (talk)
Droste is pronounced DROS-tuh. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 15:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC) Martin.
The "e" is pronounced like the "e" in "water" or "battery", the "r" is best pronounced like the Italian or Spanish "r". Dutch knows several pronunciations of the character "r", but this pronunciation is the oldest and most common.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.125.49.178 (talk) 07:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC) 

Can someone add some IPA to the article? I'm guessing it's [ˈdrɔstə], but I'm not sure (especially about the 'o'). N4m3 (talk) 23:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Collectors of US comic books call this effect infinity cover when used on the cover of a comic. I am not sure where to add this info on the page. A good reference source would be the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide. There are many examples, e.g. Bongo Comics Free For All (2007 edition), Simpsons Illustrated Magazine #4. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC) Martin.
Also Mad magazine #182. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.

I've added a Comic Book section, citing Batman #8, Action Comics #500, and Bongo Comics Free For All (Thanks, Martin, I didn't know that last one), with a cite to CBR's article. What's the WP policy for adding cover artwork? It looks like the standard is to use a low-resolution image, with a Fair use rationale. Whbjr (talk) 20:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
We don't generally add to threads that are many years old. Cover artwork is however likely to be in copyright, in which case we'd only use it in extremis, in which case the fair-use rules apply. One of those is that you can't put them in a gallery, so you'd be able to use at most one image. Another is that the image is necessary. That will be difficult to argue as the principle is already clear from the Liberty cover that we already have in the article. The "infinity cover" idea is thus not exclusive to comic books. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that is a good idea. Consider WP:SELF. --Beao 21:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I DO!  It makes it awesome.  70.161.254.199 (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Regardless of whether it's a good idea or not, the recursive image needs to be updated. The addition of the image in the "Origin" section was made after the screenshot was taken. --Kevin Renfrow (talk) 02:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh, come on. I KNEW there would be a discussion page about that as soon as I saw it. It's great, makes the point instantly clear. 98.237.37.155 (talk) 06:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Maybe it would be better suited for the "mise en abyme" article, but I also think that would be a great addition. It could go something around: "An example of a mise en abyme can be considered with this article, this chapter, this paragraph and at the lowest level this singular word". Jessynoo (talk) 10:50, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Am I alone in thinking that this isn't an example of the Droste effect? It looks cool, of course, and it's definitely recursive, but I don't think it's the same subcategory of recursion as the one in this article. Salvar (talk) 23:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I tend to agree. The article lead currently defines the term this way: "An image exhibiting the Droste effect depicts a smaller version of itself in a place where a similar picture would realistically be expected to appear." The infinite spiralling clock doesn't strike me as quite meeting that definition, and more intuitively it just doesn't look like any of the other examples. I also agree that it looks cool, though :) Rizome (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I also agree. Think I'll be bold and remove it. --Mongreilf (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe it is correct.  75.4.206.211 (talk) 05:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
The definition of the effect explicitly states is that the effect continues "ad infinitum". The logo has only a single level of repetition so it doesn't seem to qualify.
60.229.206.231 (talk) 10:22, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Where is the repetition in the logo? I looked at all three of the Sun Microsystems logos and none of them exhibit recursion. Instead, the SUN square is an ambigram. It is worth noting that Douglas Hofstadter has discussed both the Droste effect and ambigrams. 71.162.88.18 (talk) 10:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

This old discussion is closed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

As I remember, in one episode of the television show Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood, a television camera is briefly pointed at what appear to be a television tuned to a live broadcast of the show, creating a Droste effect.  In reality, the show was not broadcast live, so it must have been an on-set closed circuit monitor.  If anyone else remembers this example, it should be added, but I last saw it so long ago that I am not sure that my memory is correct.71.109.149.180 (talk) 05:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

What about a webcam pointing at the computer screen so the computer screen shows a smaller image of the computer screen? Is that a valid example? If so, I would be delighted in providing such an image - a practical use of my $5 Hong Kong webcam :-)  .
Old_Wombat (talk) 10:24, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
The fundamental problem with creating an original example is that we would only have your word that it uses the Droste effect. It wouldn't be sourced. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

The first paragraph is poorly worded. It begins with "The Droste effect is a specific kind of picture." A picture is not an effect. It has an effect. It then goes on to refer to "An image exhibiting the Droste effect," which is correct usage. In fact, the second sentence would make a much better first sentence, as it provides a definition. The first sentence is some sort of teaser, with the comment about heraldry - I think that information should be buried further down the article.
Qseep (talk) 20:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree - although it was a type of picture that was being called an effect - and I have attempted to fix it.
I do not agree that the name in heraldry is a comment about heraldry: synonyms are typically stated right at the start of the first sentence, and it is important to establish straight away that the idea isn't recent. Rp (talk) 07:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
I am happy with your correction! And I agree that it's important to note that the effect is not recent. Qseep (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

hello User:Chiswick Chap, if a reference does not exit, can I remove it ?
I mean no 5 :  See the collection of articles Medieval 'mise-en-abyme': the object depicted within itself for examples and opinions on how this effect was used symbolically.(does not exist http://courtauld.ac.uk/researchforum/projects/medievalarttheory/documents/Mise-en-abyme.pdf )
Should I alert someone before removing it ?
Thx Hexagone59 (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

We shouldn't just delete useful sources even if web pages have gone missing as they often do. Fortunately in this case the Wayback Machine of archive.org has kept copies (https://web.archive.org/web/20131102033517/http://www.courtauld.ac.uk/researchforum/projects/medievalarttheory/documents/Mise-en-abyme.pdf) so we can put in an archiveurl parameter now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Is this the original Jan Misset image for Droste?
The File:Droste.jpg has been deleted because the PD original design by Jan Misset was replaced in commercial usage by c. 1926 with the design we are all familiar with by Adolphe Mouron. It may be that File:Droste cacao echantillon blikje, foto1.JPG is the original: it would be good to have this confirmed.
Alternatively, it may be that the Jan Misset image was barely known and the only worthwhile and famous version is the now-deleted Adolphe Mouron design, in which case we might be able to defend a Non-Free Usage Rationale for it, either in this article or (maybe more easily) in an article about exactly that (undoubtedly) notable image.
I'm placing the probably-Misset image in the article now, as it looks really strange and frankly sad without Droste itself in there. For my money, the Misset version is enough like the familiar Mouron version that we have a good solution here, but your views on the questions above are welcome. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:16, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

The album cover of Pink Floyd's Ummagumma does NOT contain the Droste effect, as the picture on the wall is clearly a completely different picture than the main image. This item should be deleted. It's vaguely similar to the Droste effect, which is not noteworthy. It's not the Droste effect.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B169:E41A:F814:C42F:2D1:57B8 (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC) 

I disagree. It's not an exact example of the Droste effect, but it's more than "vaguely similar." It's clearly meant to be the Droste effect, but with minor changes and at least three sub-levels, which is more than can be said for the model village in Bourton-on-the-Water. Whbjr (talk) 19:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Please note that a Wikipedia talk page is NOT A FORUM for discussing topics, e.g. is something this effect or not. That is a matter for our sources, and we just cite them to build up an article. We can discuss here if a source is reliable, for instance, but that's about it. Hope this is clear. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

See here: [1].
An editor may use the image for this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.41.98.105 (talk) 03:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)