Seeing through Paul Virilio’s Eyes

Paul Virilio’s third and final part of his book Open Sky is profound. It is here where he ties his whole theory of technological takeover together.

Virilio discusses how we are becoming very detached from the actual image of what is actually happening. We are so consumed with the analysis provided of what we are seeing that we get lost when we look at it through our own eyes. He claims that we see more now, but are in reality, seeing less.

How is this possible? We have access to so much more information, whether it be photographs or videos that we access through television or the web, we are constantly exposed to images that are synthesized through another’s perspectives. This is what is considered a perceptual disorder, we are using technology to augment our own vision.

Aside from allowing others to dictate what we see, we are unable to see images for ourselves. Seeing through the same lens as the rest of the world is causing us to lose our sense of self. Not only are we as an individual being forced to look at images and video through someone else’s perspective is damaging to society as a whole. This contributes just as global time does to promote the “global state.”

Global state is created when someone in Florida sees the same images as someone in China. However, the perspectives by which they are discussed or presented can be very different. This is one of the ways that we fight the imposition of the global state. 

We have less of a chance to synthesize what is coming into our state of knowing and it causes us to sometimes accept things that are not real. For instance, the overwhelming presence of the Boston Marathon Bombing on televisions lately forced us to accept facts that were not necessarily true. This was exhibited in the early (and false) reporting of the bomber’s arrest.

Multiple Genres

This afternoon we read “Mutimodal Polyphony: Analysis of a Flash Documentary,” by Anders Fagerjord. The article reiterated a theme that has been present in many of our readings, that society is moving away from just written communication in favor of communication through both images and writing.

The idea that many genres of communication interact to make meaning is prevalent throughout the entire article. I found it very interesting that Fagerjord pointed out that the Web is known for mixing television, photography, and print. Obviously I already knew this, but it helped to further point out that the Web is dynamic, and likely the best means for communication that the public can access today.

Fagerjord points out that in slide-motion films the frame moves in particular ways to create different reactions.

• examining: is when the frame moves slowly over the image
• reavealing: when an examining move reveals something important that was initially hidden
• pointing: to zoom in on a detail in an image, literally pointing the particular thing out
• contextualizing: the opposite of pointing, a sort of zoom out from a detail in a picture to the whole scene

Fagerjord then goes on to talk about the addition of sound to an overall experience with an image. Sound effects anchor both the image and the language, and becomes a moderator between the two.

Discussion Questions:

1. Can you give an example of pointing on a website?

2. Is it possible to utilize all of the elements of slide-motion films in one composition?

 

 

A Year in the Life of a Furman Delta Gamma

Today is the day that our class finally gets to show off our midterm project! This project was so much fun because I chose to cover a year in the life of a DG, and more importantly, reminisce on how far I have come in the past year! We were supposed to tell a story with the photos we selected and I chose to show the story of what happens between bid days.

Be sure to take a look at the captions I have included in my Flickr slideshow.

My venture with Adobe Photoshop started just about two weeks ago and I think I am doing pretty well so far! Check out these improvements:

Before

After

Before

After

Before

After

Before

After

Before

After

See It To Believe It

Today we read “Viewers Make Meaning: Dealing with Aesthetics and Taste,” which discusses the concept of every individual having a different perception of a single image. Without getting too philosophical, this article made me think about the way we perceive the world around us. I have always wondered if colors look different to people and they just learn the different hues as “blue,” or “red.”

But I digress, Sturken and Cartwright define how an image is able to create meaning. They have decided that meaning can be created simply by following three points:

• codes and conventions that create the images can not be separated from the content of the image
• the viewers interpretation or experience with the image
• the context and environment in which the image is viewed

I kept getting hung up on the environmental influence that an audience can experience.

This is a unique concept, I believe, because we view images around us daily. For instance, if you saw a man wearing a cap and oversized sweatshirt in a jewelry store, it is likely that you would react differently to him if he was standing next to the Walmart jewelry counter.

This is the same idea as if you were to view a Monet painting in an antique store versus an art gallery. The quality of the piece is likely to be put in question if the painting is seen in the antique store.

Discussion Questions:

1. Can you give another example of how your environment has changed the way you have perceived an image?
2. What are some of the ways you can “experience” an image?

Control Freak

Okay, so maybe not “Control Freak,” per say but the idea of this post is to explain that the photographer has complete control over an image and in some sense control over your reaction to said image.

“Images, Power and Politics,” written by Sturken and Cartwright, is the first chapter of their book Practices of Looking. The first idea addressed in the article was how an image has the power to conjure up many different emotions and thoughts. Examples of these reactions were the power to persuade, call to action, and the power to remember an absent person.

Sturken and Cartwright then point out that violent scenes are conducive to voyeurism which struck a chord with me because it seems as though violence and fighting are the things on television that seem to attract the most viewers.

The article cites Charles Sanders Pierce, who has distinguished the three “signs” that make up and image:

(for sake of explanation we will use the example in the article, a cat)

1. Iconic: the actual image itself, the true being. An “alliance” is created by this image and what we understand to mean “cat.” In this case, the iconic image would be the furry thing that sits on your lap and purrs is the meaning we are looking for.

2. Symbolic: a sign for the being that literally has nothing to do with the image but that we have come to know culturally as the being. In this example, it would be the word cat. The English language has assigned a sequence of letters to every object that we have ever experienced and the letters “C-A-T” have  been associated with the image above. The authors said that these particular images have limited capacity to convey the meaning of the image because they are based on a learned system (in this case reading the English language.)

3. Indexical: a sign for the being that has a relationship with the object (in this case animal). An indexical sign for a human would be their fingerprints, because someone can be identified purely based upon the stamp made. So what about the cat? What is a cats trademark? Anything that could possibly notify the viewer that a cat is in the house. Like one of these beauties:

Sports Snapshots

Today we read Framed and Mounted: Sport Through the Photographic Eye. The chapter discussed the unique contrast in male and female stereotypes in the sports world.

The author likened the photographs of women that are featured in sports magazines to pornography. This, in my opinion, was certainly a valid point, however, it might not be the best generalization.

Publications like Sports Illustrated, are certainly sensationalizing the female body. After all, they do have an annual “Swimsuit Issue” that has images like this one on the cover:

This particular search led me to think, “What on earth is athletic about a woman posing in a bathing suit?” But I still held out hope, I searched a little further and I was lead to this image:

Yes, I agree, this photo is not much better than the previous one, but at least this woman looks like she knows a thing or two about muscle tone and exercise, rather than just dieting.

When you compare this image to those taken of men in sports photography, the Women’s Fitness photo is far from offensive. Men are often just as overexposed as their female counterparts.

The main discrepancy amongst men and women in sports photography is not necessarily the amount of overexposure that women receive but rather the frequency of which it occurs. Below are the same publication. The difference? Men are often far more covered up than women.

 

 

Discussion Questions

1. Do you think that society’s changing values can be attributed to the over sexualization of women in the athletic world?

2. Do you think that selecting sexy photos of women for the cover of fitness magazines is the best way to market the publication to their audience?

 

 

Still Photography- Do iPhones count?

This evening I read an article entitled “Digital Still Photography.”

First of all photojournalism (as defined by Kenny Irby of the Poynter Institute) is the craft of employing photographic storytelling to document life.

The unique thing about still photography is that its observation is directed by the viewer. While video is observed by a passive viewer, photos can be looked at for as long or short of a time that the audience chooses. The viewer is in control.

The History

Over time, still photography has popularized, particularly in 1888 when Kodak took the development process into their own hands and made development technicians readily available to the public. In recent decades, it has been predicted that the use of still photography would diminish in favor of new technologies, however, still photography remains one of the most popular forms of media.

After all of the technological advances in the field of photojournalism, the goal stays the same: tell the story how it was observed and get the message to the audience as quickly as possible.

Editing

The editor of still photographs is to question the entire story. The article likens the editor to a gate-keeper who knows all about the story. The author also uses the analogy of the story to a house of cards, if one card is removed, the story collapses, if one card (or picture) is added, the story will also collapse from too much weight (or in this case, information).

Newspapers:

Often with newspapers, the photo-editor can select just one image. He must take into account the article the photo is to accompany first then make sure that the stories told by both the image and written word are in sync. Key images are significantly larger than the others on the page and are frequently located on the top half of the spread.

Magazines:

Magazines work a lot like newspapers but on a smaller scale. There is often more of an emphasis on the spatial and relational aspects of the images selected.

Web:

Web design allows for different types of viewing than that of print journalism and therefore can sometimes garner more attention. Slideshows that move with purpose are often effective ways to garner attention.

According to the article, iPhone pictures do in fact count towards what we call digital still photography, but it must be presented in an effective manner to serve the purpose that the article suggests.

Discussion Questions:

1. What are some of the ways you present your photos to others?
2. Has the ability to share photos on social networking sites increased the number of photos you take?