Joyce – Page 2 – 60-461/761: Experimental Capture

Response to Photography and Observation

As the essay points out, the various functions of photography “are more than just the making of invisible things visible,” but they are “entirely new ways of observing” (43). Our ability to observe (medium of capture) and the system upon which we reason our observations (the way we measure and define typologies) mutually influence each other. For example, the curiosity for archeological objects and architectural structures facilitated the development of Raman spectroscopy and photogrammetry. The discoveries of x-rays and radiation reformulated our awareness of our own bodies.

In evaluating whether the medium of capture is ‘objective’ in contemporary culture, I want to first borrow some ideas from the theory of ‘post-truth,’ where objectivity relies upon a general consent to a system of truth that is external to what each individual perceives and believes. In the context of science, over the course of history, methods of photography respect a stable set of standards. And this allows for the notion of objectivity to stand in the context of scientific photography. However, in mass culture, it is questionable whether any type of general consent exists at the moment. Since the medium of capture now seems to be always accompanied by retouch, edit, filter, and many other types of maneuvering, I am not sure we are still attached to the notion that a photo should be objective. It is more about the reach for some type of ideal. Also, the essay mentions the assumption of complete passivity of photography, which is foundational to the idea of that it is an objective medium (19). The way we take photos in our daily life is nowhere near passive, so such objectivity breaks down. The idea of “mechanical objectivity” in general is on shakier ground nowadays, because we are increasingly suspicious of the assumption that machines are neutral with all the discourse around the biasses in technological systems.

SEM Results

I scanned a piece of a dried leaf that I picked up from my dying houseplant. At x20 magnitude, we are able to see veiny look of the leaf as well as small openings on the surface. I learned from Donna that these openings are called ‘stomata.’ A stoma is like a pore that facilitates gas exchange for plants. At x2,300 mag, we are able to see it more clearly — a few different cells act as “doors” to control the open and close of the “pore.”

Donna said that the SEM that we used is around fifteen years old. The combo of the analog and digital interfaces made it seem like a highly functioning piece of historical artifact. Navigating it also felt like remotely controlling a robot in another planet.

Due to my complete lack of knowledge in biology, I definitely did not expect to see the stoma and the even smaller cells. I did expect magical, unfamiliar patterns, but I didn’t know that this act of ‘seeing’ would lead to a more visceral understanding of the underlying structures, actions, and ‘stories’ of life. Now I can better understand what Robert Hooke might have felt when he saw those cells under his hand-crafted microscope.

Below: stereo pair

Photogrammetry exercise

(Thank you Claire!)

Response to Sean

I resonate with the point that Sean made in his review of the BriefCam, that the re-purposing of surveillance technologies can lead to creative opportunities. Surveillance footage plus analytic functionalities allow for the manipulation of visual information across space and time. BriefCam superimposes different moments of the same place together, which is ‘eerie,’ as Sean calls it, and I quite feel it. I also want to add that surveillance camera gives a sense of power, because in a way, BriefCam offers a type of ‘god-view.’ Demonstrated even in the graphic novel HER, which Sean mentions, the ability to collapse images over the course of thousands of years empowers the user/reader/audience to experience history with a new perspective.

This reminds me of Dragonfly Eyes, a feature-length narrative film by Xu Bing. It is made entirely from surveillance footage in China. Seemingly disconnected, random, transient slices of life in the form of security footage are pieced together by the artist to tell one cohesive story. Unlike works of surveillance art that emphasize the critique of and resistance towards oppressive use of the technology (as in Joseph’s post), this feature film does not quite strike me as a critique. As the film creates narrative with surveillance footage, it also creates a type of romance. Instead of acknowledging that China is a surveillance state, the film seems to (try to) prove that there is something poetic about it (and that the person who understands such poetry is the one who can collect, access, and own these surveillance footage). I wonder what the artist felt like when he was editing this film, and if he felt like a god.

Authorship Model for Today’s Cameras

This article makes clear that traditional notions of the camera break down when the machine is given “its own basic intelligence, agency, and access to information.” The labor divide between photographer and camera, human and machine becomes blurred and inconsistent. Examples such as GoogleClips and automatic image manipulation technologies suggests that taking photos or using a camera becomes a more scaffolded activity. It may seem that the increasing ‘agency’ of the camera results in a reduced sense of agency for the user of the camera — the machine is doing more, and the human is doing less — but is it also possible that the singular authorship associated with our notion of the camera is a myth? The agency of the operator — perhaps the individual who presses the button — might be more limited, but there are other people behind each camera — users, designers, engineers, scientists, business interests — who decide which realities are chosen and how they are captured and rendered. Any system of machine intelligence follows policies, and most of the times the policies are defined by human beings. Someone had to define what a “well-composed candid picture” means when designing GoogleClips. Portrait filters are based on transient standards of beauty.

Maybe, the labor model of the camera today should be one that recognizes the multiplicity of authorship involved in creating an image. Instead of emphasizing giving agency to an individual user of the camera, what would happen if we begin to emphasize a more transparent, and collaborative relationship between the multiple decision-makers behind the capture and creation of images?