dinsdag 27 november 2007

Photography or..?

Dos meus estudos.. van mijn studie..
"If an image is captured with a digital camera, there is no chemical process as with analog photography. Instead, the image is recorded by photosensitive cells and never exists except as bits. Is such an image a photograph or a computer graphic? If the image began as a conventional photograph and was scanned into the computer and digitally retouched, is it then a photograph of a computer graphic? In what is called digital photography, the result is an image that is advertised as a photograph and meant to be read as such by the viewer. The digital photographer, who captures images digitally, adds computer graphic elements to conventional photographic images, or combines two or more photographics digitally, still wants us to regard the result as part of the tradition of photography. For the photographers and their audiences, digital photography (like digital compositing and animation in traditional film) is an attempt to prevent computer graphic technology from overwhelming the older medium."

Bolter & Grusin, MIT Press, 2000, p. 105.

4 opmerkingen:

patas zei
Deze reactie is verwijderd door de auteur.
make a smile zei

De acordo. Mas então arranjemos outro nome para a imagem não analógica...Aceitam-se sugestões.

patas zei

Não há distinção entre a fotografia analógica ou digital.O que conta é o resultado final. Por enquanto é uma questão de hábito. Digital é muito melhor para o ambiente. Retocar é mais fácil. Há uma maior diversidade de papeis e melhor qualidade. Os problemas de arquivo (guardar as imagens) começam a estar resolvidos. A linguagem fotográfica está dentro do fotografo, não nos grãos prata ou nos bytes...

patas zei

Vou pensar sobre o assunto.É complicado. Mas então seria a numérica a mudar ...