User:Annalystad/secondyear/gratuateseminar/notes: Difference between revisions
Annalystad (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Annalystad (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Visual Culture Chapter 10 – Mirzoeff | Summary of Visual Culture Chapter 10 – Nicholas Mirzoeff | ||
Late 1980’s early 1990’s frequent claims were made that photography was dead or dying, because of the digitalization of the image. A part of the reason being manipulation. Mirzoeff claims that amateurs and professionals alike are aware and can see that both magazines like Vogue and cheap gossip magazines are not a representation of reality. In the OJ Simpsons trial, an image was presented as evidence, although it was decided that a full contact sheet needed to be presented for it to be accepted as evidence. Mirzoeff also talks about the image as currency because it has no identity therefore it has value. I believe it is the complete opposite, photography has identity and therefore becomes more valuable hens why it can become some form of currency. People assume that photography was an indexical medium at that time – and still is. Most discussions about photography with critics and photographers see themselves as interpreters. What happened between 1987 and 2000 was not the death of photography, it was the digitalization of money which has led to an increased possibility of surveillance and made us more vulnerable to theft. | Late 1980’s early 1990’s frequent claims were made that photography was dead or dying, because of the digitalization of the image. A part of the reason being manipulation. Mirzoeff claims that amateurs and professionals alike are aware and can see that both magazines like Vogue and cheap gossip magazines are not a representation of reality. In the OJ Simpsons trial, an image was presented as evidence, although it was decided that a full contact sheet needed to be presented for it to be accepted as evidence. Mirzoeff also talks about the image as currency because it has no identity therefore it has value. I believe it is the complete opposite, photography has identity and therefore becomes more valuable hens why it can become some form of currency. People assume that photography was an indexical medium at that time – and still is. Most discussions about photography with critics and photographers see themselves as interpreters. What happened between 1987 and 2000 was not the death of photography, it was the digitalization of money which has led to an increased possibility of surveillance and made us more vulnerable to theft. | ||
Revision as of 11:10, 25 October 2017
Summary of Visual Culture Chapter 10 – Nicholas Mirzoeff
Late 1980’s early 1990’s frequent claims were made that photography was dead or dying, because of the digitalization of the image. A part of the reason being manipulation. Mirzoeff claims that amateurs and professionals alike are aware and can see that both magazines like Vogue and cheap gossip magazines are not a representation of reality. In the OJ Simpsons trial, an image was presented as evidence, although it was decided that a full contact sheet needed to be presented for it to be accepted as evidence. Mirzoeff also talks about the image as currency because it has no identity therefore it has value. I believe it is the complete opposite, photography has identity and therefore becomes more valuable hens why it can become some form of currency. People assume that photography was an indexical medium at that time – and still is. Most discussions about photography with critics and photographers see themselves as interpreters. What happened between 1987 and 2000 was not the death of photography, it was the digitalization of money which has led to an increased possibility of surveillance and made us more vulnerable to theft.