Blog spot for Washington State University - Introduction to Digital Media class (FA332)
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Respond to Reading - comment due 10/14/08 10pm
Chapter 3 of the Reconfigured Eye. Comment on this blog post to receive credit for the reading.
12 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Following my reading of chapter 3, I found a few interesting facts regarding the reproduction and manipulation of photographs. The most intriguing fact was shown and explained on pages 47-49: the manipulation of a WWI photograph to depict three missing Vietnam pilots in a falsified ransom photo. This is, among other examples, demonstrates how photographs have been manipulated for decades, even before photomanipulation software was invented. Another interesting element is how photos may be staged: the example of the Civil War sharpshooters and the soldier at Iwo Jima demonstrate how photos can be used as factual propaganda.
All of these examples are important because society regards photographs as a demonstration of the truth (24). However, as quoted by the author, "a photograph is fossilized light" (24) and may be interpreted differently by various audiences for various purposes.
The first and most intriguing part of the 3rd chapter of reconfigured eye to me would have to be the discussion on the photograph and what it represents. The discussion begins with whether it is created via resemblance or a "denotative symbol system." Following are the poetic descriptions of the photograph: a fossilized light, a bond between fugitive reality and permanent image, direct physical imprint, an interpretation of the real, trace, etc. I like how the chapter goes into the credibility of photographs with the exclusion of human bias. When digital imaging came into play, this totally went out the window. Unfortunately, people are not as trusting in photographs anymore, claiming image manipulation. This goes on to the argument about ethics. For areas such as journalism, crime investigation, science, history, research, and copyright work, it is best that the photograph remain as original as possible. I like how the text compared digital imaging to oral epic poetry and DNA in terms of how much change it undergoes in today's generation.
I thought this reading was very interesting. I provided in depth information on the constant battle of fabricating images and if one should believe these images. I liked how it brought up a specific case involving Middle East countries concerning the image taken of a war plane was armed or not, which would have been against some treaty. If this plane was armed or not, however, the case was wether the image was fabricated to make it seem like the plane was carrying weapons. Other interesting information in this chapter was about the role of painters, photographers, and digital imagers. Also, I thought it was intersting how it brought up the issue of copyright issues since that is always an issue. Even bringing up the issue as the owner of the photo, video, etc. having the ability to manipulate it, such as George Lucas and his films that he has changed.
There are a lot of fascinating points to take from Chapter 3. I liked how they compared paintings to photographs, and explains how "a photograph is a photograph of something" while a painting could be anything an artist wants it to be whether it exists or not. It was also said that photographs are fragments of reality, records of things seen that can be viewed in different ways by people. This changed when digital imaging came into the picture.
This reading had many interesting examples, such as the one with the Libyan ambassador who was clearly convinced that the photo that was presented to him was fake. The chapter also goes into depth on the reliability and authenticity of photographs and how we can evaluate and compare facts to find out which ones are real or fake.
I thought Chapter 3 was the most interesting reading yet. If can some truth behind why we use the programs we use. some use it for fun and to create art but it can also be used for for more superior advantages. When they talked about how pictures are are pictures of one thing and how paintings are pictures in artist's heads and how they see the picture. Also how the programs we use are used to doctor pictures so that even our news organizations or government can use them to get their political point across.
I thought that the reading in Chapter 3 connected well to our current project of designing a skin for an object. Since we are turning in a photo of the skin on the object, we believe that the skin is part of this object. This relates to the reading's discussion of painting versus photography. We believe that a photograph depicts a real object, therefore we believe the skin belongs to the object because they are photographed together. If the skin was painted on an image of the photo, we would not believe that it belonged to the object.
I also found it interesting how the article presented the belief that the only choice a photographer has on the image is when he chooses to take it, whereas a painter can create any image in their imagination. There are a few other options like lighting, exposure and development techniques that lend themselves to artistic freedom, but these variables must be standardized in services like passport photos to ensure the authenticity of the program.
With the development of digital media we are able to manipulate a photograph to be anything we want. This raises many questions: what is the "original" file? how will we know if a photograph is real or crafted? will the file ever remain a constant or will it be continually manipulated through time?
I thought the most interesting part of Chapter 3 of "The Reconfigured Eye" was the part about how photographs have been manipulated for years upon years. Are these images real, or are they fabricated? It seems as though it's hard to tell, even way back in the day. The part about ethics caught my attention as well. There are certain circumstances where an image should never be changed or altered.
this chapter was very interesting. i dove even more into the idea of image versus picture, that it had touched on in the first two chapters. while it is fun to manipulate images to create certain ideas or feelings, there is a lot of controversy that can be brought up, who owns the images? and what meaning can be given to altered images? and can u really believe any images?
Photographs, after reading this article, have been staged and manipulated for many years. No need for digital manipulation if a group of people are willing to stage a photograph. That would make it more realistic and hard to tag as a false or misleading image.
Thinking about this makes me wonder how much digital images are manipulated and how even I, unintentionally, have deliberately changed an image to make it look better. Done red eye reduction on badly shot photos, cleaned them up. And even removed blemishes from faces or even whitening teeth to make a portrait image look good and professional. I did not think about it until now that I to have manipulated reality. Of course I never tried to be manipulative. It goes to show that people can be guilty of photo manipulation with out even attempting to do harm.
This chapter seems to get closer to the heart of digital imagery, in that it singles out the manipulative aspects of it. Photography, in its early days, was a means to capture the truth. A freeze frame of a moment in time, untouched except for the development. However, once that establishment is made that these photographs depict truth, when they are tampered with in a well done manner, people still hold the idea that the image is truth. As a result, problems and manipulation can occur as in the case of the pilots.
Photographs are also related to maps in this regard. Another document "known" to be true.
12 comments:
Following my reading of chapter 3, I found a few interesting facts regarding the reproduction and manipulation of photographs. The most intriguing fact was shown and explained on pages 47-49: the manipulation of a WWI photograph to depict three missing Vietnam pilots in a falsified ransom photo. This is, among other examples, demonstrates how photographs have been manipulated for decades, even before photomanipulation software was invented. Another interesting element is how photos may be staged: the example of the Civil War sharpshooters and the soldier at Iwo Jima demonstrate how photos can be used as factual propaganda.
All of these examples are important because society regards photographs as a demonstration of the truth (24). However, as quoted by the author, "a photograph is fossilized light" (24) and may be interpreted differently by various audiences for various purposes.
-- 10799170
The first and most intriguing part of the 3rd chapter of reconfigured eye to me would have to be the discussion on the photograph and what it represents. The discussion begins with whether it is created via resemblance or a "denotative symbol system." Following are the poetic descriptions of the photograph: a fossilized light, a bond between fugitive reality and permanent image, direct physical imprint, an interpretation of the real, trace, etc.
I like how the chapter goes into the credibility of photographs with the exclusion of human bias. When digital imaging came into play, this totally went out the window. Unfortunately, people are not as trusting in photographs anymore, claiming image manipulation.
This goes on to the argument about ethics. For areas such as journalism, crime investigation, science, history, research, and copyright work, it is best that the photograph remain as original as possible.
I like how the text compared digital imaging to oral epic poetry and DNA in terms of how much change it undergoes in today's generation.
10710866
I thought this reading was very interesting. I provided in depth information on the constant battle of fabricating images and if one should believe these images. I liked how it brought up a specific case involving Middle East countries concerning the image taken of a war plane was armed or not, which would have been against some treaty. If this plane was armed or not, however, the case was wether the image was fabricated to make it seem like the plane was carrying weapons. Other interesting information in this chapter was about the role of painters, photographers, and digital imagers. Also, I thought it was intersting how it brought up the issue of copyright issues since that is always an issue. Even bringing up the issue as the owner of the photo, video, etc. having the ability to manipulate it, such as George Lucas and his films that he has changed.
-10820196
There are a lot of fascinating points to take from Chapter 3. I liked how they compared paintings to photographs, and explains how "a photograph is a photograph of something" while a painting could be anything an artist wants it to be whether it exists or not. It was also said that photographs are fragments of reality, records of things seen that can be viewed in different ways by people. This changed when digital imaging came into the picture.
This reading had many interesting examples, such as the one with the Libyan ambassador who was clearly convinced that the photo that was presented to him was fake. The chapter also goes into depth on the reliability and authenticity of photographs and how we can evaluate and compare facts to find out which ones are real or fake.
- 11011637 -
i forgot to do the reading...uh oh...
10790386
I thought Chapter 3 was the most interesting reading yet. If can some truth behind why we use the programs we use. some use it for fun and to create art but it can also be used for for more superior advantages. When they talked about how pictures are are pictures of one thing and how paintings are pictures in artist's heads and how they see the picture. Also how the programs we use are used to doctor pictures so that even our news organizations or government can use them to get their political point across.
10879197
I thought that the reading in Chapter 3 connected well to our current project of designing a skin for an object. Since we are turning in a photo of the skin on the object, we believe that the skin is part of this object. This relates to the reading's discussion of painting versus photography. We believe that a photograph depicts a real object, therefore we believe the skin belongs to the object because they are photographed together. If the skin was painted on an image of the photo, we would not believe that it belonged to the object.
I also found it interesting how the article presented the belief that the only choice a photographer has on the image is when he chooses to take it, whereas a painter can create any image in their imagination. There are a few other options like lighting, exposure and development techniques that lend themselves to artistic freedom, but these variables must be standardized in services like passport photos to ensure the authenticity of the program.
With the development of digital media we are able to manipulate a photograph to be anything we want. This raises many questions: what is the "original" file? how will we know if a photograph is real or crafted? will the file ever remain a constant or will it be continually manipulated through time?
10852780
I thought the most interesting part of Chapter 3 of "The Reconfigured Eye" was the part about how photographs have been manipulated for years upon years. Are these images real, or are they fabricated? It seems as though it's hard to tell, even way back in the day.
The part about ethics caught my attention as well. There are certain circumstances where an image should never be changed or altered.
-10821166
this chapter was very interesting. i dove even more into the idea of image versus picture, that it had touched on in the first two chapters. while it is fun to manipulate images to create certain ideas or feelings, there is a lot of controversy that can be brought up, who owns the images? and what meaning can be given to altered images? and can u really believe any images?
10914255
Photographs, after reading this article, have been staged and manipulated for many years. No need for digital manipulation if a group of people are willing to stage a photograph. That would make it more realistic and hard to tag as a false or misleading image.
Thinking about this makes me wonder how much digital images are manipulated and how even I, unintentionally, have deliberately changed an image to make it look better. Done red eye reduction on badly shot photos, cleaned them up. And even removed blemishes from faces or even whitening teeth to make a portrait image look good and professional. I did not think about it until now that I to have manipulated reality. Of course I never tried to be manipulative. It goes to show that people can be guilty of photo manipulation with out even attempting to do harm.
-10858366
This chapter seems to get closer to the heart of digital imagery, in that it singles out the manipulative aspects of it. Photography, in its early days, was a means to capture the truth. A freeze frame of a moment in time, untouched except for the development. However, once that establishment is made that these photographs depict truth, when they are tampered with in a well done manner, people still hold the idea that the image is truth. As a result, problems and manipulation can occur as in the case of the pilots.
Photographs are also related to maps in this regard. Another document "known" to be true.
10782406
Post a Comment