Digital Image as a Semiotic Agent
Main Article Content
Abstract
In the context of the computational and algorithmic revolution, the digital image more than ever elevates the status of representations to the sphere of processes and operations. In a more general context, images can be seen as cultural agents, progressively developing new habits by promoting mediations between multiple subjects, whether human or nonhuman. From this perspective, we may question what characterizes the dynamics of those images. Can we consider digital images to be semiotic agents? Admitting this premise implies highlighting images not only as results or instruments but as integrated participants in processes. In light of this, we explore the digital image as a semiotic agent, from a Peircean semiotic perspective, from which the digital image can be seen as a sign, a dialogical being inserted in a network of relations.
Downloads
References
Bellour, R. (1997). Entre imagens. Papirus.
Bolter, J. Davis & Grusin, R. (2000). Remediation: Understanding new media. MIT Press.
Couchot, E. (2011). Da representação à simulação. In Parente, A (Ed.) Imagem-máquina: A era das tecnologias do virtual (4th ed., pp. 37-48). Editora 34.
Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition. Harvard University Press.
Farocki, H. (2004). Phantom images. Public, 29:12-22.
Flusser, V. (2000). Towards a philosophy of photography. Reaktion Books. (Original work published 1983)
Flusser, V. (1990). A new imagination. In Ströhl, A. (Ed.) (2002) Writings: Vilém Flusser (pp. 110-116). University of Minnesota Press.
Fuller, M. (2008). Software studies: A lexicon. MIT Press.
Gonzalez, R., & Woods, R. (2002). Digital image processing. 2aed. Prentice Hall.
Manovich, L. (2013). Software takes command: Extending the language of new media. Bloomsbury Academic.
Manovich, L. (2017). Automating aesthetics: Artificial intelligence and image culture [PDF file]. http://manovich.net/content/04-projects/101-automating-aesthetics-artificial-intelligence-and-image-culture/automating_aesthetics.pdf.
Mulder, A. (2016). Meaning and agency in the universe of technical images [PowerPoint slides]. Flusser Studies 22. http://www.flusserstudies.net/sites/www.flusserstudies.net/files/media/attachments/mulder-meaning-and-agency.pdf
Nake, F. (1997). Der semiotische charakter der informatischen gegenstände. Semiosis, 85-90, 24-35.
Nake, F. (1998). Schwierigkeiten bein semiotischen blick auf die informationsgesellschaft. In. Zimmermann, H., (Ed.), Knowledge management und kommunikationssysteme (pp. 455-468). Universitäts-Verlag.
Nake, F. (2004). Das algorithmische zeichen und die maschine. In Paul, H.J. & Latniak, E. (Eds.). Perspektiven der gestaltung von arbeit und technik. festschrift für peter brödner (pp. 203-233). Rainer Hampp.
Nake, F. (2008). Surface, interface, subface. Three cases of interaction and one concept. In Seifert, U., Kim, J.H., &
Moore, A. (Eds.) Paradoxes of interactivity: Perspectives for media theory, human-computer interaction, and artistic investigations (pp. 92-109). transcript.
Nake, F. (2016). The disappearing masterpiece. In M. Verdicchio, A. Clifford, A. Rangel, & M. Carvalhais (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth conference on Computation, Communication, Aesthetics, and X. (pp. 11-26).
Nake, F., & Grabowski, S. (2017). Think the image, don't make it! On algorithmic thinking, art education, and re-coding. Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts, 9(3), 21-31. https://doi.org/10.7559/citarj.v9i3.458
Newell, A. (1980). Physical symbol system. Cognitive Science, 4, 135-183.
Nöth, W. (2001). Máquinas semióticas. Galáxia, 1, 51-73.
Nöth, W. (2003). Semiotic machines. Journal of Semiotics, Evolution, Energy, and Development, 3(3), 81-99.
Nöth, W. (2009). On the instrumentality and semiotic agency of signs, tools, and intelligent machines. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 16(3), 11-36.
Paglen, T. (2014, November). Operational images. E-Flux. http://www.e-flux.com/journal/59/61130/operational-images
Peirce, Charles S. (1931-1958). Collected papers of Charles S. Peirce. Hartshorne, C., & Paul, W., (Eds. vols. 1-6) and Burks, A., (Ed. vols. 7-8). Harvard University Press. [Cited as CP, followed by the volume number and paragraph].
Santaella, L., & Nöth, W. (1997). Imagem: Cognição, semiótica e mídia. Iluminuras.
Santaella, L. (2013). Comunicação ubíqua: Repercussões na cultura e na educação. Paulus.
Santaella, L. (2007). Pós-humano – por quê? Revista USP, 74, 126-137. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.v0i74p126-137