Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Reconfigured Eye - Chapter 1
Respond to your reading of Chapter 1 - The Reconfigured Eye. Tell me your thoughts while reading this chapter. Was their anything surprising?... or something you don't believe..... or did something lead you to form an opinion? Remember to put your student ID somewhere within the paragraph so you receive credit. If you do not have a blogspot account, you can make a comment as "anonymous".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I was surprised to see the comparison between painting brushstrokes and the assigning of an integer to a pixel field, but it makes sense. I hadn't thought of the two being so similar. And the rationale behind digital photo manipulation being as simple as converting numbers and formula? Boggling.
The knee-jerk definition of digital images does conjure up just another way to represent a different aspect in the photographic world. However, I agree with the author about the conventions and beliefs behind digital media portraying it as a far more realized unique element then just another photographic process. As with photographs, there is the first collection of data when your finger pushes the shutter button. From that moment on, the photo and digital world start to schism apart. Photos have to be developed before manipulation can begin. With digital, the processing is immediate and the image exists as a sequence of numbers that can easily be transferred to your computer. Manipulation can be instantaneous and moves the photo into a whole new realm. You can paint, draw, sketch, collage, stamp or edit you photo in thousands of different ways, with an end result perhaps being something completely different than the original image. Plus with the advent of digital manipulation, you can make your photo appear even more photogenic and professionally achieved then you were originally capable of in the beginning.
Digital Images are a chimera of the photo world, capable of being works on their own or after extensive changes and mutations. This article gives me a much deeper appreciation of my digital camera as an art tool, beyond my first thoughts towards it just being my camera.
10921850
I find it very strange that we can manipulate and enhance pictures and photographs to such great measures. The way we use technology today enables us to concieve the unbelieveable through digitally altering images.
I never really ever took the time to consider the critical analysis of the imaging revoluation. I use my camera everywhere I go. and to know that I can skew images to make my audience see something different, completely changes the way photography is percieved. I also didn't realize that digital can be copied but the resluation can never be replicated exactly like the origional.
Overall, digital imaging continues to advance in our technical world. This will continue to challenge the truth in photography.
-10603719
When first reading the chapter i was very intrigued by the concept of analog (continuous) and digital (discrete) because I for one have always thought that the motion of walking down a ramp versus stairs is so oddly different because one is clear (digital) and the other is confusing and almost fascinating (analog) yet they both complete the same task. When thinking about it in terms of photography it makes a lot of sense as to what the purpose of it is.
It is also very interesting to analyze and overlook the process that digital imaging has gone through. It is so advanced that we are now able to dis-form and manipulate the real world around us. Its almost a scary thought because whose to say what is reality within any image we see. Also the fact that our current world is so strongly based around images. The stars we see in our magazine may not look anything like what we think they do. The new technologies can either be the newest greatest thing for our society or the downfall.
-10952248
I found it very interesting that the author kept refering to painting and digital artwork as the same thing. I have always thought of them as separate mediums of artwork and I have always been taught that they are separate.
It is true that you can use one to help the other but there are different techniques used for each medium and different skills required.
However I do see how photography could be placed in the same category. This is because most people use digital photography as their medium and use digital artwork to manipulate and distort those photographs.
10873637
i found it interesting how you can manipulate and enhance pictures with the new technologies that we have today. it is like painting with a camera.
what really made me think though in this was what Paul Delaroche exclaims, "From this day on, painting is dead.' this makes me think a lot. has technology advanced so much that this art form is on of the past? I really hope not. maybe technology will be able to add to this expressive art form.
-10837339
One of the things that stuck with me was the analogy comparing analog images to rolling down a ramp, while digital images were like a staircase. It made sense because no matter how high the resolution, a digital image is still made up of thousands of discrete pixels, and these pixels can't be broken down further. Meanwhile an analog image runs together, so you can continually enhance it.
The other thing that really struck me was how the author said that digital images were easy to modify, but analog ones were not. It seams so obvious, but I'd never really thought about it.
10849437
Can you imagine if the invention of the photograph really did kill painting?
How freaking boring would that be?
I like that they mention the idea that people take for granted that what they are seeing is real, when it could have been altered or changed. That happens on a day to day basis in magazines and other pieces.
But all I could think about was, why would a photograph have to be physically or digitally altered to be considered "altered" or changed? I think in some ways, just the way that the photograph is taken can make all the necessary alterations without physical evidence.
For example, certain lenses, or the angle of a photo, etc. Those are all alterations to me.
Digital Media in itself is very complex, and has the potential to be a wonderful addition to the art world, or has the potential to destroy craftsmanship and flip the art world on it head. It's already become the focus of modern art.
Honestly I was a little bored and my mind was wandering throughout this whole reading, so I may be a tad bit off in my observations.
10884524
The myth about the beginning of painting seems like such a romantic notion. In contrast, the developement of picture-taking through either analogous or digital means, seems more technical. However, this doesn't make neither painting nor picture-taking any less extraordinary.
As I read through the chapter, I realized just how different regular old cameras and digital cameras were in relation to one another. Zooming in to old pictures could reveal intricate details while zooming into digital photos would simply enlarge the tiny square pixels across the page. However digital photos make it so one copy made a couple decades later looks identical to the original. So there are obviously good and bad features to both sides. While I believe digital media definately takes us to a whole other level in creativity, older media such as regular cameras and painting shouldn't just be pushed aside.
11033117
It's very interesting how painting, photography, and digital imaging are all such large parts of my life yet I've never really considered their formation in relation to one another. In each case, from painting, to photography, to scanning, each had a very direct effect on the form of imaging that came before it. Growing up in a world in which all of these forms flourished, I certainly viewed them as unique and equally valuable though. I can certainly see why at the time, it appeared that photography would kill painting. Now that digital imaging is so prevalent, however, it's almost as if painting was given a new light as a more skilled and perhaps rare form of imaging. Furthermore, although photography and digital manipulation are more prevalent, they're viewed as legitimate art forms because they're so malleable now. This is notable to me because in the time of their advent, it sounded as if they were viewed as more scientific and less artistic. In any case, I feel all forms of producing images are valuable, genuine, and powerful art forms. The way they can all work together is certainly also icing on the cake.
10796594
I found the comparison to analog and digital photography really interesting. It was cool to learn that David Hemmings had zoomed in very close to his pictures without any distortion in order to show different perspectives. However when compared to a digital picture you can't because it would be more and more pixelated. It really makes you appreciate a good ole' 35mm camera.
I also found the 'Three Snapshots' time line really interesting. You would of never believed what we have today back in the 50's when the first printer was invented.
10803454
Through today's technology, we are able to enhance and manipulate our photos. Technology has come a long way since the first days of using photography. People in old times would use artists to capture images unlike cameras that we use today.
I also found it quite true about the digital art being the same as the same form as a painting.
10895167
I found it interesting that in chapter 1 it the author made a point that a photograph is different from a digital image. A digital image is put together of other parts while a photograph has a starting point and can only change with enlarging or burning multiple negtaives together.
I felt the pages were done in sections instead of actully pages, because the flow from page to page was not always contiunous which for me was 10724688 distarting. I liked the references to the past.
Not much of the imformation was to surprising. It was more of a compareing of time frames and products. I also liked the use of color pictures and black and white. Along with the examples close to the paragraph that the image is mentioned in.
This first chapter was very interesting. I have never really set back and thought about how we today can manipulate images and feel ok about it. THere are magazines who pride themselves on convincing readers that curtain people are fat or look a curtain way on Monday and a totally different way on Tuesday. Its kind of rediculious if you think about it. a part of me agreed with the quote about photogrpahy being dead. we are in a new age now where manip[ulation is the way to do it. Very few people just take pictures and leave them the way they are. I for one as a photographer am going to strive to not manipulate as much or at all anymore. 11058576
Post a Comment