Random deviation or random error / Zufällige Abweichung oder Zufallsfehler:
According to the definition, “errors” in this artistic research are not intentional, but arise in the concept by chance. In the concept of the experimental documentary photography N.N-Zwischenliegend I did not want to photograph things and other objects only, but I wanted to capture the potentiality of reality in photography as well as temporal depth. I implemented this idea in a picture with photographic techniques and technology and double exposure; these photographs were therefore combined in the same documentary photo series.
“Any measurement of a physical quantity is flawed for a variety of reasons.” (Error in physical measurements)
If random deviation or random error occurs in digital photography, is that unstable or coincidental due to natural phenomena?
If there are any discrepancies or errors in digital photography, that is to ask whether this is happening due to natural phenomena or whether it is random.
I would like to question the function of the photographic medium as an objective (visible) and transparent (invisible) medium, as in abstract photography through the use of multiple exposures of digital photographic technology and the use of these abstract images to exceed the digital photographic beliefs.
Focus of the presentation content at the conference:
1. On re-recognition by visual perception and by reproduction of environmental noise in an artistic representation.
2. Questions for the discussion:
- Do the errors in these images N.N-Zwischenliegend as “connotative” (ambiguous) complexes of symbols provide space for interpretation?
- What kind or which type of space for human freedom can be created by the art?
The context of this discussion follows the thesis and question by Flusser:
- The significance of the image as revealed in the process of scanning therefore represents a synthesis of two intentions: one manifested in the image and the other belonging to the observer. It follows that images are not “denotative” (unambiguous) complexes of symbols (like numbers, for example) but “connotative” (ambiguous) complexes of symbols: they provide space for interpretation.
- A philosophy of photography is necessary for raising photographic practice to the level of consciousness, and this is again because this practice gives rise to a model of freedom in the postindustrial context in general. A philosophy of photography must reveal the fact that there is no place for human freedom within the area of automated, programmed and programming apparatuses, in order finally to show a way in which it is nevertheless possible to open up a space for freedom.
(…)
In the new context, however, the question of freedom is formulated differently: If everything is based on chance and necessarily results in nothing, then where is there space for human freedom?
(...)
The task of a philosophy of photography is to reflect upon this possibility of freedom – and thus its significance – in a world dominated by apparatuses; to reflect upon the way in which, despite everything, it is possible for human beings to give significance to their lives in face of the chance necessity of death. Such a philosophy is necessary because it is the only form of revolution left open to us.
(Vilém Flusser, “The Image”, “Why a Philosophy of Photography Is Necessary”,Towards a Philosophy of Photography, Göttingen: EUROPEAN PHOTOGRAPHY Andreas Müller-Pohle, 1983, English-language translation, London: Reaktion Books Ltd, 2000)
My understanding of "revolution" in Flusser's thesis is "evolution" that is the possibility of space for human freedom.*
*In the digital age from the perspective of the 21st century, this deals with DH (Digital Humanities)
From the philosophy of analogue photography to the philosophy of digital photography)
Thus, I would like to explore Flusser's thesis evolutionally. – from the cuvist perspective
I presented my exposition B.O.D.Y. - the second skin, at the conference APRAN 2023 the Matter of Art.
In the exploration, I has evolved from cubism to digital.