The media object selected for analysis is the Daguerreotype. Louis-Jacques-Mande Daguerre (1787-1851), a Romantic painter and printmaker, had introduced the Daguerreotype on 7th January 1839 and would forever change the perspectives of the visual experience through photography (Daniel, 2004). Ever since the advent of the Daguerreotype, people were able to view a detailed imprinting of a certain visual frame on a treated sheet of copper (which today is called the film) (Daniel, 2004).
The daguerreotype served as a medium for two fundamental forms of expression in the early days – in the field of both the arts and sciences (Daniel, 2004). Daguerre discovered that he could capture images of artistic sculptures so that people could appreciate art even though they were not physically present at the location of the art piece, he also realised that it could be used as a scientific tool where the daguerreotype could capture images through microscopes and other scientific devices so that people did not have to possess any scientific equipment to view the generated images (Daniel, 2004). The unprecedented ability to reproduce a certain image that once could only be viewed through the human eye and stored in the human brain made the daguerreotype a phenomenal invention.
Prior to the invention of the daguerreotype, the Camera Obscura was the main optical instrument that was used to project images onto paper. The Camera Obscura was a device in the shape of a box that allowed light, which was being reflected from the images that the user was intending to capture, to enter through an opening at one end of the box to form an image on a surface and an artist would then trace the image to form the most accurate impression of an image at that peri...
... middle of paper ...
...John Wiley & Sons.
Mahtani, S. (2012, April 20). Singapore's Lee Hsien Loong Joins Facebook. Retrieved February 2014, from The Wall Streeet Journal: http://blogs.wsj.com/searealtime/2012/04/20/singapores-lee-hsien-loong-joins-facebook/
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media, the Extensions of Man, Part 1. New York.
Nardinelli, C. (1993). Industrial Revolution and the Standard of Living. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/IndustrialRevolutionandtheStandardofLiving.html
Tolmachev, I. (2010, March 15). A history of Photography Part 1: The Beginning. Retrieved Febraury 2014, from tuts+ Photography: http://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/a-history-of-photography-part-1-the-beginning--photo-1908
Wiebe E Bijker, T. P. (1987). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. London: The MIT Press.
Photogenic drawing is an invention which is an early photographic procedure made by William Henry Fox Talbot. According to Malcolm Daniel his invention, which was made during the industrial revolution, opened up a whole different world for photography (Malcolm Daniel, William Henry Fox Talbot (1800–1877) and the Invention of Photography, Metmuseum.org). Moreover, Talbot’s innovation became the foundation of 19th and 20th century photography. The photogenic drawing concept led through many impacts on modern world.
happening in the world, with more and more people just accepting the new social classes and not protesting their unfairness. This source not only helps us understand the living conditions of the time but also the change in society that occurred during the Industrial
"History of Art: History of Photography." History of Art: History of Photography. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 May 2014. .
2 Gustavon, Todd. Camera: A History of Photography from daguerreotype to Digital. New York, NY: Sterling Publishing, 2009
In the early 1400s, Italian engineer and architect, Filippo Brunelleschi, rediscovered the system of perspective as a mathematical technique to replicate depth and form within a picture plane. According to the principles, establishing one or more vanishing points can enable an artist to draw the parallels of an object to recede and converge, thus disappearing into a “distance”. In 1412, Brunelleschi demonstrated this technique to the public when he used a picture of the Florence Baptistery painted on a panel with a small hole in the centre.3 In his other hand, he held a mirror to reflect the painting itself, in which the reflected view seen through the hole depicted the correct perspective of the baptistery. It was confirmed that the image
.... 'It is a moment when the visible escapes from the timeless incorporeal order of the camera obscura and becomes lodged in another apparatus, within the unstable physiology and temporality of the human body'. Crary further demonstrates the shift in vision's location from camera to body by examining the way in which it was reproduced in various optical devices invented during this same period, specifically the stereoscope, the kaleidoscope, the phenakistiscope, and the diorama. His examination is based on a provocative premise: 'There is a tendency to conflate all optical devices in the nineteenth century as equally implicated in a vague collective drive to higher and higher standards of verisimilitude' (110). According to Crary, such an approach tends to neglect entirely how some of these devices were expressions of what he calls 'nonveridical' models of perception.
Tim Jenison, the man behind the documentary film entitled Tim’s Vermeer set out to replicate a painting in the style of the beloved artist Johannes Vermeer. In order to do this, Jenison replicated a system of lenses that he believed Vermeer had used hundreds of years before him for the sake of duplicating the correct light variations around the objects of his muse. The course of the documentary showcases Jenison as he first constructs this hypothesis of Vermeer mastering light, moves on to Jenison's development of his lense device, and finally to Jenison using his device to paint a work of art in hope that it will be comparably close enough to the work of Vermeer that his hypothesis can be proven. Whether or not Jenison succeeded can be debated and was one of the topics that the panel of professors including Professors Baugh, Gorchoff, Myers, Willhardt, and Wright discussed at the convocation.
In this article, David Grann examines the work of Peter Paul Biro in an art authentication in a delightful heading “The Mark of a Masterpiece” (Grann 1). Notably, Biro had a claim that he has innovatively designed a camera that is above any available camera. This brings to the understanding that this character is using his own professionalism and ideas to achieve what he wants to. As a fact, he scooped a dozen of fortune, including DARPA, NASA, several universities, and R. and D fortune from numerous departments of about five hundred technology companies all of which are from his own effort. Therefore, we can speculate that Grann was a genius who used the same gift towards his success. Moreover, at his thirty years, he smartly developed a suitable computer science that would process high definitive data. In fact, he had mastery of both DNA analysis, and fingerprint forensics alongside a comprehensive understanding of both art conservation and art history (Grann 2). With his professionalism, Grann contributed in the world of art. He once said everyone would only seek to see what he or she wants to see from portraits or painting; a view that is shared by other authors. Therefore, conclusively we can say that Biro’s ideology as described by the author; as a single genius compounds his human idiosyncrasy that is within his awareness and exploitation ability that is characteristic of the elites of the world of art. The artistic works are compounded in individual’s professionalism and understanding, which also determines their understanding and interpretation of such work and this, has been controversially demonstrated by different authors and moviemakers as they address same school.
This trend also found roots in the emergence of photographic technology, originally developed in the early 1800’s and advanced continuously until the present. During this time, artists and photographers suddenly found that they could much more easily captur...
Mackenzie, D. A. & Wajcman, J. (1985). The Social shaping of technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
“The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts” is about "integrated social constructivist approach towards the study of science and technology"(pg 399). The author's Pinch and Bijker discuss that even though it has been a practice to separate science and technology, but they are hugely connected because of this they might benefit from each other. The authors discuss about the three main parts of science and technology termed as "Sociology of science", "the science technology relationship" and the "technology studies".
Georges Didi-Huberman is critical of the conventional approaches towards the study of art history. Didi-Huberman takes the view that art history is grounded in the primacy of knowledge, particularly in the vein of Kant, or what he calls a ‘spontaneous philosophy’. While art historians claim to be looking at images across the sweep of time, what they actually do might be described as a sort of forensics process, one in which they analyze, decode and deconstruct works of art in attempt to better understand the artist and purpose or expression. This paper will examine Didi-Huberman’s key claims in his book Confronting Images and apply his methodology to a still life painting by Juan Sánchez Cotán.
The industrial revolution created the societal circumstances necessary for photography to be born. The first and most obvious condition is that of technological advancement. Industry was advancing and expanding so rapidly that history appeared to be distancing itself from the present with unusual speed. Up until this time period life had not changed much from decade to decade or even from century to century. Photography’s popularity during the industrial revolution was, in large part, a result of people’s desire to slow down the perceived acceleration of history (McQuire). It has been argued that the acceleration of historical time is “leading to the possible industrialization of forgetting” and that “we will not only miss history…we will also long to go back to space and times past.” (Virilio)
As a result of these ideas, he created the daguerreotype. This invention is very significant because it caused the industry to flourish and it “was being used commercially in every industrialized nation by the late 1840s”. Although these daguerreotypes were small and hard to copy, they were still a milestone in the development of photography. The daguerreotype allowed for the portraits of many important figures in society to be taken. This influenced the average person during the time to get their own portraits taken as well (Osterman 28).
The only thing that the audience can see is just the images. They are unaware of the machines creating them. In an everyday life a person is constantly surrounded by many moving images. They can be billboards, commercials, films or live images happening in a real time. Is it possible to find the etiological origin of the small screen? The solution remains more speculative compared to the big screen. It may be essential to remind the fact that since the beginning of the fire screens were frequently ornamented with pictures. Throughout the Victorian era, the big folding screens used in the home for numerous reasons repeatedly turn into true mixtures of all kinds of printed pictures, remembering the numerous "scrapbooks" made by women and kids as fun. However, the images operate mainly as a decorative item, such screens expect the future improvement of media culture, displaying the vast spread of inexpensive mass-produced images in the 19th century, thanks to advances in print equipment and image duplicate technologies. Undeniably, the routine of decorating screens with images has become so usual that average artwork has occasionally been compared by