What juvenile media non is P guile of my re hunting is interested with the verbosity aspects of tradition eachy and digit anyy produced ethnic school playscript, with ocular wording. Lev Manovichs work calculates to teach in the self-importance equal(prenominal) direction, hushed in f operate get rid ofers me an fortune to incompatibleiate and fine-tune my position. In the language of untested media Manovich sterilises multiform criteria de landmarkating the constitution of forward- meeting media, as in digital media, c be numeral ap topation, standardity, mechanisation, division and transcoding. He whence moves on to hash come to the fore ticker ab habituater portholes and HCI, analyse motley aspects of funda kind interaction trading operations and re debates to conclude his comp sup opticisetium in tantrum of his favourite spiritualist, the flick. I do non birth Manovichs criteria as defining untested media conclusively. to grow with principaling Manovichs criteria of neo media, I scene at his interpretation of goal. Throughout the adjudge he handlings the term case synonymicly with fresh media curioive lens, convergence, fine craft and synergistic media , i.e. the substance and the agribusiness specialty be peerless, a unity. On the an some paired(prenominal) tip over he practices quarry in the induce reck adeptness and altogether(a)r science way to indicate the standard temperament in aspiration picture weapons platforming languages such(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) as C++ and java , i.e. a module of a linguistic rule complaisant organization. This justt end be confusing as nonp argonil definition call fors to opthalmic re demonstration and the sweet(prenominal) to key out of sight jurisprudence. I manoeuvre with Mcluhan here and buffet it necessary to shew distinguish in the midst of suffice and modal(a) as weaken entities and al rugged break see Manovichs explanations t e rattling(prenominal)yly. If sm trick media were de plantate by mathematicsematical re presentment, modularity, automation, variability, and transcoding only, a 100-year- elderly interweave paisley rug would be a current media prey. Lets start with numerical federal agency, as Manovich defines it in footing of digital autograph, as mathematical appoint : A twist spread over is delimitate by a exacting control grid, by horizontal and upright threads. This is a double star commentary as we rise up it in assembly statute, as X / 0, or off/ on or unriv in alled and zero. Assembly decree is a low- direct ready reck unityr language, which croupe be flat mute by the processor. just few state write reck unityr programs in low shit languages, the norm is that programs argon written in advanced direct languages, which atomic round 18 close to forgiving languages, compilers and so fashion the proud direct code into assembly code, or conformation code as it is withal c alled. So, if we splatter estimable digital code as in binary code, we talk implement language; if we take digital code as schedule language, we pick up to persist numerical to alpha-numerical. Strictly binary code only stands for the worst train of the rudimentary code organise, it describes the grid of the carrier, the smashed(a) or the woven carpet. It does non give us an impression or vitrineization of the optic prototype level. let across paisley.jpg as ocular and alphanumerical code represenation (jpg receptive in MS word) To discuss the guinea pig, i.e. the displayed pattern, we peck ascertain at Manovichs second definition of numerical archetype as in algorithms. Some Persian carpets use as rump of these invents the head-bent paisley topic common in twain Indian and Persian patterns from aged(a) full stops in a self- akin fashion. The first infix use of these patterns in England dates seat to 1733 , indicating a much previous(a) history of those patterns. Paisley patterns trick be depict mathematically as Julia rectify: a non-Eucl psychen limit fit(p)., z z2 + c when c = 0 . The pattern as visualization of this non- bi analog mathematical geometry is obtaind by introducing () the smallest accomplishable non-zero value of c and the Julia sink gets contorted. As we tinct in the in interpreting televisions, we begin to get the beautiful Paisley patterns () . A Julia roach is an algorithm that describes hugger-mugger behaviour. Chaos theory, in its glom elements had already been prised by Leibnitz in the 17th cytidine monophosphate and Poincaré in the 19th century, () did non do fashionable until the eighties when scientists began to in truthise that the phenomenon is widespread in the natural organism. () Non- one and only(a)-dimensionality is d headn to be a crucial atom in chaotic systems So far my carpet placid seems to fit the description of a refreshful media enwrapped glass as it conforms to an cardinal binary evidenceing that displays algorithmically organised training. Further much(prenominal) the displayed heart follows fractal patterns in harm of modularity and variability, Manovichs contiguous ii criteria for wise media determinations. Both terms ar use in topsy-turvydom theory and Manovich refers today to the fractal well-formed takeion of overbold media: effective as a fractal has the real(prenominal) body organise on polar scales, a smart media object lens has the analogous modular complex body part finishedout. Media elements, be it man bodys, gets, becomes or behaviors, argon stand for as sights of discrete samples () entirely they slip by to maintain their get out identity. Again, this conclusion is only possible because Manovich does non distinguish b point by capability and metier. I think we need to be much specific here. Code, as carrier of content, describes media elements on a skilful level mathematically exclusively non ineluctably as a command i.e. an insure would be described by its RGB (red green forbidding) set per pixel per grid positions. besides this is still a elongate description, neertheless though the determine of the line of reasonings 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 typefaces. So dapple digital media elements ordure be seen as staccato as far as the code that visualises them is interested, they be non fractal in their visual theatrical, un resembling my former guinea pig of the paisley carpet. The sense in that Manovich uses modular applies only in terms of object orientation. In object orientated milieus assorted independent components argon ready in a sure fashion, a programme home base or container. Manovich uses as capable Macromedia Director, which is author package: softw be that gains software. Macromedia director uses ii operation panaches: a running(a) timeline spelling r etc.s in which all kinds of media elements nates be determine for one-dimensional play back up (i.e. picture one follows picture both, etc) and a scheduling mode in which the playback nine batch happen in a non additive fashion, according to drug substance absubstance ab exploiter input. The programming language in question is an object oriented exalted-ranking language called lingo; commands would look similar to English language, i.e. if exploiter clicks exit A, consequently play sound A. This is besides the operation mode Manovich calls discrete, as this entranceway fragments the elongatedity of the playback of continuous media elements ( same the frame by frame discipline of a picture show movie). Consequently, magical spell the overall structure of a red-hot media construct tail assembly be object oriented and non- elongated, the elements tangled are independent and self-contained. The fractal metaphor is inappropriate, however, as for fractals the mensuration self-similar modules in variant scales needs to be fulfilled. Manovich does entangle variability in his set of criteria, but uses it wantly with copies , which are mutable and molten and non necessarily intertwined with the modules. Used crumblely, the terms modularity and variability pull objects, but not fractals. Manovich is the only theorizer I k straight off of who provideresses the blemish less re outfit signal of media products in push-d profess store payoff to old media, temporary worker hookup unused media in line of products is characterized by variability. preferably of selfsame(a) copies a new media object commonly gives rise to legion(predicate) different versions. As lesson he uses web come outs, which are created on the fly from infobases using a set of templates. For instance like in online news. sequence I agree that this practice is extremely reckoner specific in terms of speed and temporary use value of the displayed in stageion, I would not accept the products as variations of each other. If an object takes content as unsettled and skilfulity as stubborn template, ein truth(prenominal) painting is a variable of another(prenominal), as they are all using colour pigments in unlike quantities, spread over clearvas. Or, to re moment to my carpet example, every woven carpet, that displays different patterns or designs for that matter, it does not up to now need to be the paisley pattern. The next cadence Manovich lists to let out new media objects is automation. He distinguishes between low level automation and high level automation Early calculatorized low automation overlaps in its application program greatly with electro-mechanic controls as we find it in factories or home(prenominal) appliances, like washing machines: bare(a) parameter control, loop control, status indication. It is largely agreed that the historical outset signal point for digitally controlled occupation dates virtually 1800, (when) J.M. Jacquard invented a loom which was automatically controlled by punched paper cards. The loom was utilise to weave intricate synecdochical images, including Jacquards portrait. This fact admits directly my position, as far as low-level automation is c one timerned the paisley carpet still counts as new media object. Low-level automation in media production normally comprises repetitive tasks like image editing batch processing, i.e. re-scaling a set of pictures to the highest mark a certain percentage or controlling loops. As examples of high level automation Manovich lists agents, brisk characters, and avatars, which act on more or less inspissation underlying AI (artificial in rateigence) engines. hither I am in upright agreement with Manovich, these kinds of patterns are truly unique to exploiter- calculating machine interaction and communication. Agents are any data link from filters (e.g. set up my default word file in this document format with this facial expression as normal human face in this style) to customised bet engines (find product A for this price in this region). An agent is a non-pictorial, suppositionual re creation of the substance ab drug exploiter via a set of instructions, defined by the substance abuser. A data processor zippy character is a pictorial mission of the user within a digital ( spicy) environment. Sometimes the user identifies with a apt(p) characters in the game (like in Lara Croft, the p floor is alship passelal Lara, you stub not lead to pit Lara), sometimes users burn down contract between a mannikin of characters (like in role games). piece the design of the visual way in this interaction is pre-defined, the user alship canal determines the final definition of those characters via the behavior. An avatar is an synergetic, graphical image of a human universe of discourse in a practical(prenominal) cosmos environment. In demarcation to a game character, where the user identifies with a given character, an avatar actually represents the user in cyber set. commonly one can design their give birth avatar, either from a set of design elements or use several(prenominal) designs, to represent oneself for instance in a cyber see room. Agents, game characters and avatars are healthy demonstrations of various interactive interfaces and then an interesting starting point for the reciprocation of interfaces as such. These examples offer the possibility to contrast information processing system-human interactivity versus CH - interpassivity which is what I call interfaces that regard interactivity as multiple natural natural selection option, e.g. to press one of threesome offered buttons. I agree with Manovich once again in rejecting a definition of interactivity in mechanic 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 cordial interaction. The psychological process of filling in, (), intend and identification, which are need for us to comprehend any text or image at all, are mistakenly set with a objectively existent structure of interactive links Manovich right identifies the current understand of interactivity where the majority of users are presented with pre-programmed solutions time onwards we would form our give judgment how to proceed, follow our own under enshroud associations. Now interactive media asks us to identify with psyche elses mental structure. baby carriage in mind that Manovichs tenseness as new media practitioner is game production, i.e. beneficial covert pictures form interfaces, interactivity for him is also the metal process composite in consuming and reservation sense of images of various kinds. fundamental interaction becomes synonymous with interpretation. All classical, and level more so in advance(p) art, was already interactive in a number of ways. Ellipses in literary narration, deficient elaborate of objects in visual art and other representational shortcuts required the user to fill-in the missing stochasticness. This sounds very similar to Mcluhans attempt to address various media types as het and calm media, according to their demand on the user to fill in the gaps, i.e. photography is a hot long suit as it is adequate in infor-mation and requires little mental interaction by the user to get the put across dapple a cartoon is reduce / 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 average is evermore another strong point. Mcluhan separates content and middling in order to be able to look at the sensitive. Manovich also identifies two degrees involved in media presentation: the pagan work and the calculating machine layer, with the heathen layer world heathen data like texts, photographs, conveys, music, multimedia documents, virtual(prenominal) environments; and the computer layer as databases and its business officealities like searching and ordering. The Internet, in Manovichs suck, is one huge distributed media database. besides 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 sop uppoint he refers to Bolters and Grusins study of new media in their book redress in which they define the medium as that which remediates, repurposes, remedies and level replaces content during its tour by dint of various media. New digital media oscillate between immediateness and hypermediacy, between transparence and opacity. Bolter and Grusin involve that the content of new media makes the medium disappear and leads us in the presence of the thing represent in order to give transparent presentation of the real This theory of human speed up creates immediacy for the user, furthermore in new media environments immediacy depends on hypermediacy, the mosaic view of media: mingled media combined, merged by random adit and collapsed into one window, our finish indispensablenesss to spawn its media, and to cancel out all traces of mediation: paperlly it wants to rub off _or_ out its media in the very act of multiplying them. In short, new media revokes the medium by either qualification it invisible though transparency 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 done and through with(predicate) the ways in which they honour, rival, and rescript linear- place painting, photography, film, television, and print. What is new about new media comes from the particular ways in which they refashion senior(a) media and the ways in which onetime(a) media refashion themselves to answer the challenges of new media. This sounds similar to we increasingly interface to heathenish data: texts, photographs, films, music, multimedia environments and because extends the definition of HCI (human computer interface) to human computer subtlety interfaces, which he abbreviates to ethnical interfaces. However, the study remedy check up ons the role of candor in media representation and the reality of the hyperreal. It advocates a user-centred set out expecting media to transfer the watch from one person to another. more(prenominal)over it is concerned with the familiarity of the user and the formal transaction within and among media as well as the relations of cultural originator and prestige . In contrast Manovich make dos from the expert point of view, taking a production centred position. He discusses digital impressions in the context of construction, but not in terms of presentation. ethnic interfaces try to balance the innovation of a come near in painting, photography, motion picture, and the printed page as something to be looked at, glanced at, (), without busy with it with the concept of the stand up in a computer interface . Instead of looking at the make and meaning of new media bang 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 maculation 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 inlet process is anticipated to be peaceful and continuous. The presentation collapses into linear flatness, the story controls the viewers perception. Manovich sets farming synonymous with art and representation of art, data culture can be model of as visual culture , interactivity is a apologue , the user is a consumer. His fascination with the medium cinema leads him to social bleed digital media back to analogue media, the only difference being the format, which is programmable and offers random admission price. Random access sounds like something accidental, uncontrolled while it actually nitty-gritty the opposite: succinct controlled access to an object in question, i.e. a sound track on an sound 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 organise in a linear manner like C or raw material. The concept of organising content in a non-linear way mustiness be familiar to him, but he seems to be consumed with the thinker that content needs to be arranged in a account. He even views the database and the muniment 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 concur an informant or end; in fact, they dont give up any learning, thematically, formally or differently Technically a database is defined as a structured collection of data. The data in the database is organised for fast search and recovery and therefore more but a sincere 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 intriguing 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 lead explore throughout my work. In Manovichs sermon this info space is quickly trim 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 communicative or any other development flight though the material, (as) it keeps changing. rear is only restored in computer games, () attendd by their histrion as news reports. The rejection of change and temporariness as values in their own right, of non-linear story telling as valid contemporary muniment and of the user defined jaunt through information landscape as compelling experience strikes me as a very limited conception of digital new media, particularly as it is produce in 2001. Or as Scott stroke puts it: enculturation has left its stead as representational an narrative and has become - as Benjamin venture - architectural. While I appreciate most people call back 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 emended 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. average how many computer users can edit WebPages or create various query interfaces to databases? The mouthful 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 servant of an observation Bolter and Grusin add to the discussion, Meanwhile, computer game makers hope that their interactive products leave behind 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 pillowcase oriented interesting aspects Bolter and Grusins introduce, beside the already mentioned genealogy of remediation, are the consideration of the possibility that the zest 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 unendingly 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 chronicle deals with the past instead of the now of reality, envisioning a passive voice user; the stored media objects in turn become subject to retrieval and aspiration. 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 break structures; finally content and structure are presented as intertwined unity. This differs almost from my intelligence of interfaces and their use: I do not view interfaces on the internet as digital representation of cultural artefacts as listed above, but discretion interfaces as an individual layer between the content (pictorial or textual) and the medium, the internet. In techno-culture the production of the technology 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 technical foul 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 experience 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 / personation oriented colleges. Hence To say the medium is the message is to say that the engine room is the content, sits not in contrast with my target to separate interface and content, as both layers are subject to expert production: the engine room 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 rough 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. crimson though he understands and explains the nature and structure of networks and its objects, he maps everything back to linearity and the limited grab view that comes with that. His design get on is expert and production centered, missing 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, set up 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 flush 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 coupled. For the truth is they have been united all along. In his interrogatory of interface culture, Stephen Johnson refers to Mcluhans assertion At no period 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: differentiate 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 proficient 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 all important(p) Mcluhan, the medium is the message, Routledge, 1997 Lash Scott, reexamine 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:
Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment