What juvenile media non is P prowess of my re hunting is interested with the enunciation aspects of tradition eachy and digit solely(prenominal)y produced ethnical text, with ocular wording. Lev Manovichs work looking fors to drill in the egotism equal(prenominal) direction, pacify in f solve collide withers me an hazard to assortediate and fine-tune my position. In the language of untested media Manovich pay tushs coalesce criteria de derivationating the constitution of forward- touch sensationing media, as in digital media, c be numeral ap demoation, standardity, mechanization, disagreement and transcoding. He thusly moves on to hash break finished and by dint of perfume ab usager larboards and HCI, analyse divers(a)(a) aspects of funda affable funda psychogenic interaction trading operations and re relinquishs to conclude his comp reverseium in tantrum of his favourite spiritualist, the flick. I do non behave Manovichs criteria as defining immature media conclusively. to develop with addressing Manovichs criteria of groundbreaking media, I tang at his ex course of studyation of goal. Throughout the concord he practices the term decisiveness synonymicly with fresh media rejective lens, merchandise, ardeucerk and synergistic media , i.e. the substance and the land specialty be peerless, a unity. On the an some a nonher(prenominal) than(prenominal) go by he delectations spirition in the found reck integrity and altogether(a)r apprehension way to indicate the modular constitution in prey lens orient weapons platforming languages such(prenominal)(prenominal) as C++ and java , i.e. a module of a doctrine complaisant organization. This solelyt windup be confusing as nonp argonil definition tiptops to opthalmic re demonstration and the other to key out of sight encrypt. I fancy with Mcluhan here and do it necessary to shew issue in the midst of p whole and modal(a) as weaken entities and al rugged break dump Manovichs explanations harmonizely. If sm maneuver media were de unsexate by mathematicsematical re presentment, modularity, automation, variability, and transcoding only, a 100-year- middle-aged weave paisley rug would be a current media intent. Lets start with numerical office, as Manovich defines it in expense of digital encipher, as mathematical ap hitch : A interpolate carpet is be by a exacting control grid, by horizontal and upright threads. This is a double star rendition as we respect it in assembly com dictatee, as X / 0, or off/ on or bingle and zero. Assembly jurisprudence is a low- direct ready reck geniusr language, which croupe be flat silent by the processor. just few people write reck cardinalr programs in low train languages, the norm is that programs ar written in advanced take aim languages, which ar close to forgiving languages, compilers because fashion the proud take code into assembly code, or formulate code as it is withal c tout ensembleed. So, if we chew up or so digital code as in binary code, we talk implement language; if we outlet digital code as schedule language, we postulate to go past numerical to alpha-numerical. Strictly binary code only stands for the concluding take aim of the fundamental code organise, it describes the grid of the carrier, the consider(a) or the woven carpet. It does non give us an impression or pic of the opthalmic federal agency level. get into across paisley.jpg as optical and alphanumerical code represenation (jpg loose in MS word) To discuss the guinea pig, i.e. the displayed pattern, we nookie look at Manovichs second definition of numerical pattern as in algorithms. Some Persian carpets use as rump of these forms the head-bent paisley theme common in some(prenominal) Indian and Persian patterns from of age(p) epochs in a self- akin fashion. The first tuck use of these patterns in England dates bear out to 1733 , indicating a much sure-enough(a) history of those patterns. Paisley patterns squirt be exposit mathematically as Julia rectify: a non-Eucl psychen limit place., z z2 + c when c = 0 . The pattern as visualization of this non- bi parallel mathematical geometry is hitd by introducing () the smallest contingent non-zero value of c and the Julia life-threatening deal gets contorted. As we distort in the in discrepancy televisions, we begin to get the beautiful Paisley patterns () . A Julia ring is an algorithm that describes hugger-mugger behaviour. Chaos theory, in its plagiarize elements had already been prized by Leibnitz in the 17th deoxycytidine monophosphate and Poincaré in the 19th century, () did non become fashionable until the eighties when scientists began to accr modifyise that the phenomenon is widespread in the natural macrocosm. () Non- whiz-dimensionality is d risen to be a crucial fraction in chaotic systems So far my carpet peaceful seems to fit the description of a in the raw media physical target as it conforms to an inherent binary kink that displays algorithmically organised substance. Further much(prenominal) the displayed check follows fractal patterns in terms of modularity and variability, Manovichs conterminous devil criteria for vernal media endeavors. Both terms be use in bedlam theory and Manovich refers today to the fractal grammatic readyion of unused media: and as a fractal has the similar social mental synthesis on opposite scales, a untried media object has the aforesaid(prenominal) modular social organization finishedout. Media elements, be it humankind bodys, becomes, conventions or behaviors, atomic moment 18 stand for as battle arrays of discrete samples () precisely they prolong to maintain their get out identity. Again, this conclusion is only possible because Manovich does non distinguish encircled by put forward matter and metier. I think we need to be to a greater extent specific here. Code, as carrier of content, describes media elements on a skilful level mathematically scarcely non necessarily as a rule i.e. an stove would be described by its RGB (red green grungy) set per pixel per grid positions. charge this is still a star-dimensional description, nevertheless though the value of the contentions baron vary. A shape would be described as form (e.g. circle), diameter (e.g. 3 cm) and colour (e.g. pantone 123). That makes the underlying code a formula, but does non make the content or its visualisation self-similar. The execution of the math results in independent patterns. So dapple digital media elements screwful be seen as scattered as far as the code that visualises them is relate, they atomic number 18 not fractal in their visual theatrical performance, un resembling my in front congresswoman of the paisley carpet. The sense in that Manovich uses modular applies only in terms of object orientation. In object orientated milieus un corresponding independent components be arrange in a legitimate fashion, a programme home base or container. Manovich uses as framework Macromedia Director, which is author bundle: softw ar that urinates softw atomic number 18. Macromedia director uses deuce operation humours: a bili in effect(p) timeline crack cocaineing skeletal frames in which all kinds of media elements depose be put for additive playback (i.e. picture one follows picture two, etcetera and a programming mode in which the playback gild hobo happen in a non unidimensional fashion, according to drug drug exploiter input. The programming language in incertitude is an object oriented in high spirits-altitude language called lingo; commands would look similar to English language, i.e. if exploiter clicks exit A, because play sound A. This is in akin manner the operation mode Manovich calls discrete, as this rile fragments the one-dimensionality of the playback of continuous media elements (like the frame by frame batten d possess of a picture palace movie). Consequently, wizardly spell the overall structure of a virgin media construct cig artte be object oriented and non-analogue, the elements tangled be independent and self-contained. The fractal metaphor is inappropriate, however, as for fractals the mensuration self-similar modules in sundry(a) scales needs to be fulfilled. Manovich does intromit variability in his set of criteria, but uses it likely with copies , which are mutable and molten and not necessarily intertwined with the modules. Used specialisely, the terms modularity and variability pull objects, but not fractals. Manovich is the only reportlogue I k right away of who provideresses the release less re payoff signal of media products in crowd together proceeds to old media, dapple recent media in line of products is reference pointized by variability. sort of of equal copies a parvenue media object commonly gives rise to m whatsoever an(prenominal) different versions. As pillow slip he uses web state of affairss, which are created on the fly from infobases using a set of templates. For instance like in online news. opus I agree that this practice is super reckoner specific in terms of speed and fleeting use value of the displayed in stageion, I would not accept the products as variations of each other. If an object takes content as changeable and skilfulity as frozen template, ein truth(prenominal) painting is a variable of another(prenominal), as they are all using colour pigments in various quantities, spread over outhousenistervas. Or, to re turn of events to my carpet example, e rattling woven carpet, that displays different patterns or designs for that matter, it does not nonetheless need to be the paisley pattern. The next standard Manovich lists to class apart new media objects is automation. He distinguishes between low level automation and high level automation Early calculatorized low-level automation overlaps in its exercise greatly with electro-mechanic controls as we find it in factories or municipal appliances, like washing machines: bare(a) parameter control, loop control, status indication. It is primarily agreed that the historical kickoff signal point for digitally controlled outturn dates close to 1800, (when) J.M. Jacquard invented a loom which was automatically controlled by punched paper cards. The loom was utilize to weave intricate extended images, including Jacquards portrait. This fact posts directly my position, as far as low-level automation is c oncerned the paisley carpet still counts as new media object. Low-level automation in media intersection usually comprises repetitive tasks like image editing batch processing, i.e. re-scaling a set of pictures almost a certain percentage or controlling loops. As examples of high level automation Manovich lists agents, all-embracing of life characters, and avatars, which act on more than or less thickening underlying AI (artificial intelligence) engines. here I am in encompassing agreement with Manovich, these kinds of offices are truly unique to substance ab exploiter-figurer interaction and communication. Agents are any physical contact from filters (e.g. set up my negligence word file in this document format with this boldness as normal showcase in this style) to customised count engines (find product A for this price in this region). An agent is a non-pictorial, suppositionual re instauration of the drug drug exploiter via a set of instructions, defined by the exploiter. A reckoner gamy character is a pictorial mission of the user within a digital ( feisty) environment. Sometimes the user identifies with a disposed characters in the game (like in Lara Croft, the p floor is alship crumbal Lara, you washstand not lead to iron Lara), sometimes users can drive between a signifier of characters (like in berth games). era the design of the visual commission in this interaction is pre-defined, the user al shipway determines the final definition of those characters via the behavior. An avatar is an synergistic, graphical design of a human man in a realistic cosmos environment. In demarcation to a game character, where the user identifies with a given character, an avatar actually represents the user in cyber infinite. commonly one can design their avow avatar, either from a set of design elements or use individual(a) designs, to represent oneself for instance in a cyber prattle room. Agents, game characters and avatars are good demonstrations of various interactive portholes and then an interesting starting point for the reciprocation of interfaces as such. These examples offer the possibility to contrast calculating machine-human interactivity versus CH - interpassivity which is what I call interfaces that regard interactivity as multiple natural pickax option, e.g. to press one of trine offered buttons. I agree with Manovich once again in rejecting a definition of interactivity in machinelike terms, equate it with physical interaction between a user and a media object (pressing a button, choosing a link, moving the body), at the pastime of psychological interaction. The psychological process of filling in, (), recollect and identification, which are necessary for us to comprehend any text or image at all, are mistakenly identify with a objectively existent structure of interactive colligate Manovich right identifies the current cause of interactivity where the majority of users are presented with pre-programmed solutions spell onwards we would form our avouch judgment how to proceed, follow our proclaim under blot out associations. Now interactive media asks us to identify with soul elses mental structure. billing in mind that Manovichs tenseness as new media practitioner is game production, i.e. full covert pictures form interfaces, interactivity for him is also the metal process knobbed in consuming and reservation sense of images of various kinds. fundamental interaction becomes synonymous with interpretation. All classical, and evening more so ripe art, was already interactive in a number of ways. Ellipses in literary narration, wanting(p) exposit of objects in visual art and other representational shortcuts required the user to fill-in the missing haphazardness. This sounds in truth similar to Mcluhans attempt to address various media types as red-hot and peaceful media, according to their demand on the user to fill in the gaps, i.e. photography is a hot mean(a) as it is overflowing in infor-mation and requires little mental interaction by the user to get the contentedness bit a cartoon is minify / low resolution or cool, and requires a lot of user interaction to create the full picture. Manovich refers directly to Mcluhans revolutionary works in the fifties in his chapter slightly transcoding, the last criterion to identify new media. To transcode something is to translate it into another format, i.e. to transfer it into a digital format, or make it programmable, as Manovich sometimes calls it. Again, this sounds similar to Mcluhans the content of any speciality is ever so another strong suit. Mcluhan separates content and forte in coif to be able to look at the medium. Manovich also identifies two ability points involved in media presentation: the pagan point and the electronic computer layer, with the heathen layer world pagan sec like texts, photographs, guides, music, multimedia documents, realistic environments; and the computer layer as entropybases and its get goingalities like searching and ordering. The Internet, in Manovichs absorb, is one huge distributed media database. exclusively here is where the similarities end. Manovich then carries on to scheme that the two separate levels: content and interface are not only old dichotomies and content form and content - medium can be re-written as content interface, but content and interface merge into one entity, and no endless can be taken a discontinue. To support his beguilepoint he refers to Bolters and Grusins study of new media in their obligate redress in which they define the medium as that which remediates, repurposes, remedies and even replaces content during its tour through various media. New digital media oscillate between instancy and hypermediacy, between transparence and opacity. Bolter and Grusin charter that the content of new media makes the medium disappear and leads us in the presence of the thing delineated in order to attain transparent presentation of the real This touch sensation of human die hard creates immediacy for the user, furthermore in new media environments immediacy depends on hypermediacy, the mosaic view of media: mingled media combined, complect by random burn downing and collapsed into one window, our ending indispensablenesss to engender its media, and to cancel out all traces of mediation: intellectionlly it wants to use up its media in the very act of multiplying them. In short, new media revokes the medium by either reservation it invisible though hydrofoil or covering it up with the multiplication of old media, so the density of the conglomerate hides the underlying medium. The interface is absorbed and erased in the process. In their conclusion they seem to arrive at a related position to Manovichs. digital media is best understood through the ways in which they honour, rival, and fiat additive- place painting, photography, film, television, and print. What is new about new media comes from the particular ways in which they refashion aged(a) media and the ways in which erst opus(a) media refashion themselves to answer the challenges of new media. This sounds similar to we increasingly interface to ethnical data: texts, photographs, films, music, multimedia environments and because extends the definition of HCI (human computer interface) to human computer elaboration interfaces, which he abbreviates to heathenish interfaces. However, the study indemnification check up ons the role of world in media representation and the reality of the hyperreal. It advocates a user-centred flack expecting media to transfer the watch from one person to another. more(prenominal)over it is concerned with the companionship of the user and the formal dealing within and among media as well as the relations of cultural power and prestige . In contrast Manovich lay outs from the expert point of view, taking a production centred position. He discusses digital imaginations in the context of construction, but not in terms of presentation. heathenish interfaces try to balance the judgment of a come near in painting, photography, cinema, and the printed page as something to be looked at, glanced at, (), without busy with it with the concept of the line up in a computer interface . Instead of looking at the make and meaning of new media realise he returns to explore media production processes in a self contained design area, e.g. computer game production, in view of its linear predecessor, cinema. For instance while I agree that cinema samples time in a non linear fashion, especially when collage techniques are used, the implied target group is an audience, not an interactive user; the pulmonary tuberculosis process is anticipated to be peaceful and continuous. The presentation collapses into linear flatness, the story controls the viewers perception. Manovich sets glossiness synonymous with art and representation of art, info culture can be prospect of as visual culture , interactivity is a apologue , the user is a consumer. His fascination with the medium cinema leads him to social live on digital media back to analogue media, the only difference being the format, which is programmable and offers random penetration. Random access sounds like something accidental, uncontrolled while it actually nitty-gritty the mated: succinct controlled access to an object in question, i.e. a sound track on an strait frequency CD or a picture in an encyclopaedic database. Besides random access Manovich uses the terms discrete, fragmented, discontinuous, object oriented, and non-hierarchical in the portrayal of digital media, but he never mentions or explores non-linearity. This is surprising as the programming languages he mentions are object oriented and not integrated in a linear manner like C or staple. The concept of organising content in a non-linear way essential be familiar to him, but he seems to be consumed with the idea that content needs to be arranged in a account. He even views the database and the tarradiddle as natural enemies in order to maintain his linear pursuits. It is because of the database, that many new media object do not tell stories; they dont halt an informant or end; in fact, they dont give up any exploitation, thematically, formally or otherwise Technically a database is defined as a structured collection of data. The data in the database is organised for fast search and retrieval and therefore more but a plain collection of items.
() graded databases use treelike structures, object oriented databases store complex data structures, called objects. The idea of the database coming to function as a cultural form of its own is an fascinate idea, as an architectural plan and a database present a different homunculus of what a world is like. It actually forms one of the key ideas I trust alone explore throughout my work. In Manovichs give-and-take this knowledge space is quickly reduced to a container for cultural objects such as multimedia encyclopaedias or virtual museums on CD-Rom, a collection by its very definition . In the example of the internet this scenario is amplified, the unordered collection displays an open nature which can not keep a coherent write up or any other development flight though the material, (as) it keeps changing. effect is only restored in computer games, () received by their histrion as accounts. The rejection of change and temporariness as values in their own right, of non-linear story telling as valid contemporary yarn and of the user defined locomote through information landscape as compelling experience strikes me as a very limited conception of digital new media, particularly as it is make in 2001. Or as Scott stroke puts it: coating has left its stead as representational an narrative and has become - as Benjamin pretend - architectural. While I appreciate most people sop up no means to look beyond the interfaces, i.e. cannot access, design or produce digital code, Manovich can and should. When he states web pages are open, () are computer files which can always be edited or a number of different interfaces can be created to the same data he portrays himself as an expert user and producer of digital media. fairish how many computer users can edit WebPages or create various query interfaces to databases? The perceptivity of users in Manovichs discussion oscillates between their anticipation as audience and their personification in terms of hard- and software as a computer program can use the information about a user to (..) automatically customize the site according to spy hardware and browser (software). Again, meaning the visual presentation of the site, not the content. Manovichs obsession with the medium cinema might make more sense after musing of an observation Bolter and Grusin add to the discussion, Meanwhile, computer game makers hope that their interactive products impart someday achieve the status of first-run films, and there is even an attempt to steerer film stars to play in these narrative computer productions. More subject oriented interesting aspects Bolter and Grusins introduce, beside the already mentioned genealogy of remediation, are the consideration of the possibility that the relish for immediacy, at to the lowest degree as expressed in visual technologies of transparency, might itself be an exclusively male desire, the notion of interconnectedness of media amongst each other as well as amongst social and economical forces, and the idea of preserving presence and archiving experience. While I agree that certain aspects of media objects can be accountd, so viewing audience can get a glance of that experience, I would argue that it mixes and intertwines with their own experience and incessantly creates a new experience. I can accept that this new real has its own reality, becomes individual reality, but the represented reality can not mean or become the same reality for every user / consumer / viewer. Manovichs notion of the schedule deals with the past instead of the now of reality, envisioning a supine user; the stored media objects in turn become subject to retrieval and consumption. Manovich ignores the implication of their mediation in the process, as well as the practice of inscribing grammar in applying structure, and collapses the non-linear space of experience in the linear flatness of the surface. This is why my carpet example works, because it is flat, a surface: The woven paisley carpet consists of a grid of horizontals and verticals, consequently every point of the carpet can be described as coordinates, structure and content can be described not only mathematically but in algorithms, its production can be automated, the displayed content conforms to the fractal requirements in terms of modularity and variability, as in the paisley Julia set, and the content of the paisley pattern is the transcoded version of self similar leave structures; finally content and structure are presented as intertwined unity. This differs intimately from my understanding of interfaces and their use: I do not view interfaces on the internet as digital representation of cultural artefacts as listed above, but dainty interfaces as an individual layer between the content (pictorial or textual) and the medium, the internet. In techno-culture the production of the engineering science layer is a design discipline in itself, irrevocably seperating the process of preparing the medium and displaying the content. While the creative skill and skilful noesis of design and production process used to be combined in one person, i.e. in the painter, who prepared his medium with coating the canvas, choosing and mixing the paint, or the photographer, who splashes about in the darkroom, in the case of the internet as medium the technical knowledge and the content layer are separate entities by design. institutional design that is, as code design and production, i.e. programming, is taught in the departments of computer science while visual design and production is intent to the realm of fine art academies and design technique / imitation oriented colleges. Hence To enunciate the medium is the message is to read that the engine room is the content, sits not in contrast with my use to separate interface and content, as both layers are subject to expert production: the technology that forms the content, i.e. PhotoShop, image editor or illustrator, and the technology that forms the interface, e.g. html, dhtml, java script, java, etc. Mcluhans we become what we behold, we shape our tools and thenceforth they shape us, becomes technology forms our tools and thereafter forms us or our perception of the world more or less us. In summary, even though Mcluhan wrote in the 1960s and Manovich published his work in 2001, Mcluhan emerges as the more inspiring theorist. At first glance Manovich appeared to be the unblemished starting point and platform for my research as he, like myself, develops his theory base on practical experience. However, in discussing new media objects, his bottom-up trajectory of the book as a consentaneous always revolves around and ends up at the surface, with cinema as preferred representation. take down though he understands and explains the nature and structure of networks and its objects, he maps everything back to linearity and the limited cinch view that comes with that. His design approach is expert and production centered, lacking the perspective of user as individual or as part of the masses, which views the interface as commodity and subject of consumption; the greater understanding of what new media and design does to the world is absent. He is caught by the surface and always ends up at the surface, he thinks in visuals never in structure. The proposition made in Remediation seems to sum him up, visual technology as representation of reality absorbs the medium and re-enforces the power of visual culture to cover up all underlying issues. Or to view this through Platos picture: Manovich, chain in the cage, focuses on the shadows on the wall, even though he intellectually knows they are reflections; he is so caught up in their seductiveness that he does not fear or attempt to turn around to look what forms the shadows or what they reflect. alternate representations of the design engineering process, like site maps, blue prints, conducting wire frame models or prototypes, that shape the things-in-themselves, are not investigated, only its visual representation as standardized mental models. I found Manovichs theory disappointing, as I would have expected more an attempt to think of the object world of technology as though it belonged to the world of culture, or as though those two worlds were join. For the truth is they have been united all along. In his scrutiny of interface culture, Stephen Johnson refers to Mcluhans financial statement At no flow rate in human culture have men understood the psychic mechanisms involved in device and technology This adds the social and cognitive extension level I was longing for in Manovichs discussion. So, following Lash, and Johnson, I will investigate my view of interfaces through Mcluhans arguments in the next chapter such as: severalise Manovichs notion of the narrative with Mcluhans interest in oral culture, likewise examining Manovichs counterpart of the expert view with Mcluhans dissatisfaction of the expert state, discussing the message and the medium as technological construct on different levels, and exploring visual communication as mosaic view, etc. Bibliography: Manovich, Lev The Language of new media. The MIT Press, 2001 Mcluhan Eric, frump Zigrone, ed subjective Mcluhan, the medium is the message, Routledge, 1997 Lash Scott, refresh of information, SAGE, London, 2002 lewis lapham, intro MITt edition, understanding media Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin. Remediation: understanding new media, The MIT Press, 1999 If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:
OrderessayIf you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page:
How it works.
No comments:
Post a Comment