Here are some photos from the World War One era which use a similar concept. But instead of rice plants, these use tens of thousands of people to create the pictures.

http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/living-photographs-photograp...

I have seen some albeit more simplistic rice art when I went to Japan. I had to climb a little tower to see them, it was such a cool idea at the time; the one I saw showed that popular Japanese woodblock print with the waves on it, which I can't seem to find.

Unfortunately I lost pictures of it in a hard drive crash, but it's really nice to see IRL and I'd recommend it if you're visiting nearby one. Mine was somewhere in Iwate prefecture.

It's called The Great Wave off Kanagawa by Hokusai:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Wave_off_Kanagawa

Civic engagement in Japanese agriculture was a challenge for rural communities when I was living in Japan, this village's activity seems similar to 4H clubs in the US.

I don't see how these are three-dimensional. Is it because they depict three-dimensional objects? But then aren't most (all) paintings 3D?

For some pictures: http://www.inakadate-tanboart.net/

Hmmm, I wonder if you could do something similar with hydrangeas and an irrigation system that controls the ph of the soil on a per plant basis

Wouldn't have to be per plant if you can isolate the pH of two regions at the boundary.

True, I guess I was hung up on the "plants as pixels" idea!

2D

The perspective correct ion makes them appear to float in space.

I'm in the UK and I am not allowed to view this page:

BBC Worldwide (International Site)

We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee. It is run commercially by BBC Worldwide, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BBC, the profits made from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes. You can find out more about BBC Worldwide and its digital activities at www.bbcworldwide.com.

I don't watch live TV so I don't pay the licence fee. Shouldn't I therefore be allowed to see this page?

Regardless of having a license fee or not (I do as while I don't watch live TV I do have a TV in the house and I like the BBC) I think license payers should be able to view this kind of content. Without the fee the BBC wouldn't exist (in its current form at least) to make projects the projects that aren't funded by the fees. Anyone have a mirror, please?

The BBC are not allowed to commercially compete in the UK, BBC worldwide is the commercial arm of the BBC, so this content mustn't be shown in the UK.

But by having a commercial arm, the BBC can generate income from the rest of the world and provide more value to the licence fee payers.

So you want this to exist as it makes the homegrown BBC better, even if it's frustrating not to be able to read it.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I understand why I can't see the content I just think the way it is set up is wrong. I appreciate the license fee doesn't cover the full cost of the BBC and that the commercial arms brings in an awful lot of money that the wider BBC benefits from, but it should be set up in a way that means license payers can see the content produced by the commercial arm.

In the same way the rest of world should (maybe can, not sure) be able to pay an annual fee to view the content that is aired on BBC in the UK.

There are very strict rules around the BBC and what it can do within the UK (showing adverts is the most obvious, but also fair trading rules around promoting for-profit entities). Lots of things will be blocked simply to avoid this.

You can read this (and any other BBC Worldwide article) by entering the url at http://archive.is.

Here's the link for this article: http://archive.is/lJkKW

Yeah, not sure what the revenue stream is. Why do they care? Anyway,tor is always two clicks away and is fine here, so whatever!

Just use tor