Are Digital Picturings Representations?
Are Digital Picturings Representations?
复制标题
DOI：
10.14236/ewic/eva2010.27
复制
发表时间：
2010-07
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Carusi;G. Novakovic;Timothy Webmoor
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Carusi;G. Novakovic;Timothy Webmoor
艺术哲学家罗杰·斯克鲁顿（Roger Scruton）声称，摄影图像不是表征，其基础是因果过程的作用，而不是达到摄影图像内容的故意过程（斯克鲁顿，1981）。他的主张在当时是有争议的，现在仍然是，但他的优点是成为一个跳板，可以提出关于描绘和可视化技术导致什么样的表现的重要问题。在不同类型的计算图像化的背景下，在成像和其他形式的可视化中，这个问题再次出现，但这一次以一种更有趣的形式出现，因为这些技术通常是不同原理和技术的混合体。数字图像是物理、数学和技术原理之间复杂的相互关系的结果，嵌入人类和社会环境中。本文由三个部分组成，每个部分都从不同的角度提出了一个问题，即数字成像和数字视觉伪像是否通常是表征。这些观点并不具有代表性，而只是为了实现斯克鲁顿的论文所成功实现的目标，即成为更广泛讨论的挑衅和跳板。
The philosopher of art Roger Scruton has claimed that photographic images are not representations, on the basis of the role of causal rather than intentional processes in arriving at the content of a photographic image (Scruton, 1981). His claim was controversial at the time, and still is, but had the merit of being a springboard for asking important questions about what kinds of representation result from the technologies used in depicting and visualising. In the context of computational picturing of different kinds, in imaging and other forms of visualisation, the question arises again, but this time in an even more interesting form, since these techniques are often hybrids of different principles and techniques. A digital image results from a complex interrelationship of physical, mathematical and technological principles, embedded within human and social situations. This paper consists of three sections, each presenting a view of the question whether digital imaging and digital visual artefacts generally are representations, from a different perspective. These perspectives are not representative, but aim only to accomplish what Scruton's paper did succeed in accomplishing, that is, being a provocation and a springboard for a broader discussion.