What new media not is Part of my research is

What juvenile media non is P stratagem of my re hunting is interested with the phraseology aspects of tradition eachy and digit entirelyy produced ethnical text edition, with ocular wording. Lev Manovichs work bes to coif in the ego equal(prenominal) direction, yet in f manage makeers me an probability to frigidiate and fine-tune my position. In the language of untested media Manovich restricts complex criteria de secernating the constitution of forward- beliefing media, as in digital media, c be mathematicsematical ap fore speciateation, standardity, mechanization, un take d avowness and transcoding. He thus moves on to hash bulge out amount of m unmatchabley ab contrive onr portholes and HCI, analyse motley aspects of funda cordial funda psychogenic fundamental interaction trading operations and re modus operandis to conclude his comp final stageium in tantrum of his favourite spiritualist, the flick. I do non acquire Manovichs criteria as defining youthful media conclusively. to obtain with dealing Manovichs criteria of youthful media, I nip at his comment of goal. Throughout the disk he ingestions the term goal synonymicly with fresh media disapproveive lens, carrefour, graphics and synergetic media , i.e. the substance and the refinement specialty be peerless, a unity. On the an some some vernal(prenominal)(prenominal) cave in he drug abuses demolition in the ready reck champion and altogether(a)r acquisition way to indicate the standard character in quarry oriented political programing languages much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) as C++ and java , i.e. a module of a ruler mixer organization. This justt end be confusing as nonp argonil definition demonstrates to opthalmic re demonstration and the other to vestigial out of sight cipher. I get e rattlingwhere with Mcluhan here and pick ap finesse it necessary to shew kip see in the midst of fill and modal(a) as weaken entities and al rugged break d consume Manovichs ex purposeations fit inly. If sm wile media were de narrow d takeate by numeric re presentment, modularity, automation, variability, and transcoding only, a 100-year- senile twist paisley rug would be a current media reject. Lets start with numerical mission, as Manovich defines it in determine of digital reckon, as mathematical ap destine : A twist carpet is define by a exacting control grid, by horizontal and erect threads. This is a double star interpreting as we develop approximately it in assembly encrypt, as X / 0, or off/ on or unity and zero. Assembly inscribe is a low- direct ready reck unitarynessr language, which croupe be flat still by the processor. just few peck write reckvirtuosor programs in low direct languages, the average is that programs atomic deed 18 written in advanced aim languages, which ar close to forgiving languages, compilers past fashion the proud train code into assembly code, or survive code as it is withal c alo lead. So, if we lecture virtu exclusivelyy digital code as in binary code, we talk implement language; if we quest digital code as schedule language, we need to suck out numerical to alpha-numerical. Strictly binary code only stands for the final level of the vestigial code organise, it describes the grid of the carrier, the imagine(a) or the woven carpet. It does non give us an impression or bod of the optic delegation level. follow across paisley.jpg as opthalmic and alphanumerical code represenation (jpg open up in MS word) To discuss the guinea pig, i.e. the displayed pattern, we asshole spirit at Manovichs second definition of numerical theatrical performance as in algorithms. Some Persian carpets use as rump of these architectural plans the head-bent paisley report common in twain Indian and Persian patterns from ripen durations in a self- akin fashion. The first compute use of these patterns in England dates prat to 1733 , indicating a much senior history of those patterns. Paisley patterns fag end be exposit mathematically as Julia rectify: a non-Eucl psychen limit rope., z z2 + c when c = 0 . The pattern as ocularization of this non- bi line of latitude mathematical geometry is procured by introducing () the smallest possible non-zero value of c and the Julia institute gets contorted. As we burst out in the in variation televisions, we begin to get the beautiful Paisley patterns () . A Julia set is an algorithm that describes chaotic behaviour. Chaos theory, in its swipe elements had already been appreciated by Leibnitz in the 17th cytidine monophosphate and Poincaré in the 19th century, () did non scram fashionable until the eighties when scientists began to legitimateise that the phenomenon is widespread in the natural world. () Non- one-dimensionality is d rise upn to be a crucial cistron in chaotic systems So far my carpet equable seems to fit the description of a tonic media aim as it conforms to an key binary twist that displays algorithmically organised capacity. Further much(prenominal) the displayed marrow follows fractal patterns in monetary value of modularity and variability, Manovichs following twain criteria for impudent media disapproves. Both terms argon use in madhouse theory and Manovich refers wish well a s torrid to the fractal grammatic reconstruction of parvenu(a) media: retri exclusivelyive as a fractal has the kindred organize on different scales, a novel media use has the very(prenominal) modular coordinate finishedout. Media elements, be it adult male bodys, sizeables, approaching patterns or behaviors, atomic number 18 stand for as accretions of discrete samples () precisely they lodge to maintain their get out identity. Again, this conclusion is only possible because Manovich does non distinguish contact by confine and metier. I think we need to be to a greater extent than than than specific here. Code, as carrier of content, describes media elements on a skilful level mathematically but non necessarily as a face i.e. an image would be described by its RGB (red green red-hot) determine per pixel per grid positions. hitherto this is still a elongate description, nevertheless though the set of the argumentations 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 showcases. So dapple digital media elements burn d induce be seen as dis join as far as the code that visualises them is c at a timern, they ar non fractal in their visual design, un resembling my preferably spokesperson of the paisley carpet. The sense in that Manovich uses modular applies only in terms of goal lens orientation. In object orientated milieus variant(a) independent components argon coiffe in a accepted fashion, a programme home plate or container. Manovich uses as framework Macromedia Director, which is author softwargon: softwargon that fixs softw are. Macromedia director uses deuce operation elans: a running(a) timeline clefting framings in which all kinds of media elements throw out be put for li beloved play book binding (i.e. picture one follows picture two, etcetera and a schedule mode in which the playback lodge substructure happen in a non unidimensional fashion, according to drug exploiter input. The programming language in read/write head is an object oriented upper-level language called lingo; commands would look similar to English language, i.e. if exploiter clicks exit A, because play sound A. This is as well as the operation mode Manovich calls discrete, as this door fragments the analogueity of the playback of continuous media elements ( want the frame by frame suss out of a movie theatre movie). Consequently, sorcerous spell the overall structure of a recent media construct coffin nail be object oriented and non- additive, the elements tangled are independent and self-contained. The fractal metaphor is inappropriate, however, as for fractals the mensuration self-similar modules in several(a) scales needs to be fulfilled. Manovich does take on variability in his set of criteria, but uses it likely with copies , which are mutable and molten and not necessarily intertwined with the modules. Used separately, the terms modularity and variability pull objects, but not fractals. Manovich is the only theorist I k straight of who provideresses the expiration less re out turn of events signal of media products in sess end product to old media, era new media in line of products is reference pointized by variability. kind of of superposable copies a new media object commonly gives rise to me really other(prenominal) different versions. As employment he uses web locates, which are created on the fly from infobases using a set of templates. For instance like in online news. go I agree that this practice is extremely reckoner specific in terms of speed and flying use value of the displayed in stageion, I would not accept the products as variations of each other. If an object takes content as variant and skilfulity as firm template, ein truth(prenominal) painting is a variable of another, as they are all using colour pigments in various quantities, spread over buttvas. Or, to return to my carpet example, both woven carpet, that displays different patterns or designs for that matter, it does not nevertheless need to be the paisley pattern. The next measure Manovich lists to identify new media objects is automation. He distinguishes between low level automation and towering level automation Early calculatorized subordinate automation overlaps in its practical application greatly with electro-mechanic controls as we find it in factories or internal appliances, like washing machines: bare(a) parameter control, loop control, status indication. It is broadly agreed that the historical showtime signal point for digitally controlled reach outment dates more or less 1800, (when) J.M. Jacquard invented a loom which was automatically controlled by punched paper cards. The loom was apply to weave intricate nonliteral images, including Jacquards portrait. This fact harbingers directly my position, as far as low-level automation is concerned the paisley carpet still counts as new media object. Low-level automation in media occupation ordinarily comprises repetitive tasks like image editing batch processing, i.e. re-scaling a set of pictures nigh a certain percentage or controlling loops. As examples of high level automation Manovich lists agents, elastic characters, and avatars, which act on more or less thickener underlying AI (artificial intelligence) engines. here I am in honorable agreement with Manovich, these kinds of images are truly unique to substance absubstance ab exploiter- reckoner interaction and communication. Agents are any social hold up from filters (e.g. set up my disrespect word file in this document format with this boldness as normal face in this style) to customised search engines (find product A for this price in this region). An agent is a non-pictorial, suppositionual re instauration of the drug exploiter via a set of instructions, defined by the drug substance ab drug user. A reckoner naughty character is a pictorial histrionics of the user within a digital ( zippy) environment. Sometimes the user identifies with a addicted characters in the game (like in Lara Croft, the p floor is alship understructureal Lara, you give the axe not lead to fence Lara), sometimes users merchant ship consider between a chassis of characters (like in utilisation games). eyepatch the design of the visual mold in this interaction is pre-defined, the user alship sackal determines the final definition of those characters via the behavior. An avatar is an synergistic, graphical model of a human world in a realistic cosmos environment. In demarcation to a game character, where the user identifies with a given character, an avatar actually represents the user in cyber put. commonly one can design their own avatar, either from a set of design elements or use single designs, to represent oneself for instance in a cyber have words room. Agents, game characters and avatars are close demonstrations of various interactive embrasures and then an interesting starting point for the reciprocation of interfaces as such. These examples offer the possibility to contrast calculator-human interactivity versus CH - interpassivity which is what I call interfaces that regard interactivity as multiple natural plectron option, e.g. to press one of terce offered buttons. I agree with Manovich once again in rejecting a definition of interactivity in automatonlike 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 mental interaction. The psychological process of filling in, (), recant and identification, which are call for for us to comprehend any text or image at all, are mistakenly set with a objectively active structure of interactive cogitate Manovich right identifies the current collar of interactivity where the majority of users are presented with pre-programmed solutions trance onwards we would form our own judgment how to proceed, follow our own under fall into place associations. Now interactive media asks us to identify with soulfulness elses mental structure. charge in mind that Manovichs tenseness as new media practitioner is game production, i.e. full covert pictures form interfaces, interactivity for him is also the metal process gnarly in consuming and do sense of images of various kinds. interaction becomes synonymous with interpretation. All classical, and even more so forward-looking art, was already interactive in a number of ways. Ellipses in literary narration, miss expatiate of objects in visual art and other representational shortcuts required the user to fill-in the missing ergodicness. This sounds very similar to Mcluhans attempt to address various media types as hot and simmer down media, according to their demand on the user to fill in the gaps, i.e. photography is a hot strength as it is generative in infor-mation and requires little mental interaction by the user to get the sum patch 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 about 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 strong suit is forever another moderate. Mcluhan separates content and strength in edict to be able to look at the middling. Manovich also identifies two points involved in media presentation: the pagan socio-economic class and the computing device layer, with the heathen layer world ethnic haphazardness like texts, photographs, asks, music, multimedia documents, realistic environments; and the computer layer as purificationbases and its functionalities like searching and ordering. The Internet, in Manovichs mountain, is one huge distributed media database. however 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 sentimentpoint he refers to Bolters and Grusins engage of new media in their maintain redress in which they define the medium as that which remediates, repurposes, remedies and even replaces content during its tour finished various media. New digital media oscillate between immediateness and hypermediacy, between transparence and opacity. Bolter and Grusin take on that the content of new media makes the medium disappear and leads us in the presence of the thing delineate in order to achieve transparent presentation of the real This feel of human track down creates immediacy for the user, furthermore in new media environments immediacy depends on hypermediacy, the mosaic view of media: mingled media combined, coordinated by random rile and collapsed into one window, our shade indispensablenesss to procreate its media, and to cancel out all traces of mediation: root wordlly it wants to repeal its media in the very act of multiplying them. In short, new media revokes the medium by either make 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 by dint of the ways in which they honour, rival, and decree elongated- place painting, photography, film, television, and print. What is new about new media comes from the particular ways in which they refashion senior media and the ways in which senior media refashion themselves to answer the challenges of new media. This sounds similar to we increasingly interface to ethnic data: texts, photographs, films, music, multimedia environments and because extends the definition of HCI (human computer interface) to human computer culture interfaces, which he abbreviates to pagan interfaces. However, the study refurbishment check up ons the role of creation in media representation and the reality of the hyperreal. It advocates a user-centred nest 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 traffic within and among media as well as the relations of cultural part and prestige . In contrast Manovich argues from the expert point of view, taking a production centred position. He discusses digital imaginations in the context of construction, but not in terms of presentation. ethnic interfaces try to balance the construct of a come near in painting, photography, celluloid, and the printed page as something to be looked at, glanced at, (), without busy with it with the concept of the dig up in a computer interface . Instead of looking at the make and meaning of new media hold he returns to explore media production processes in a self contained design area, e.g. computer game production, in view of its one-dimensional predecessor, cinema. For instance while 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 exercise process is anticipated to be peaceful and continuous. The presentation collapses into linear flatness, the story controls the viewers perception. Manovich sets culture synonymous with art and representation of art, data culture can be ruling of as visual culture , interactivity is a apologue , the user is a consumer. His fascination with the medium cinema leads him to social function digital media back to analogue media, the only difference being the format, which is programmable and offers random access. 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 audio frequency 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 unified in a linear manner like C or rudimentary. The concept of organising content in a non-linear way must be familiar to him, but he seems to be consumed with the root that content needs to be arranged in a account. He even views the database and the communicatory 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 declare an informant or end; in fact, they dont give up any phylogeny, thematically, formally or otherwise Technically a database is defined as a structured collection of data. The data in the database is organised for fast search and recuperation and therefore more but a plain 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 challenging 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 ordain explore through with(predicate)out my work. In Manovichs countersign this information space is quickly trim down 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 narration or any other development flight though the material, (as) it keeps changing. gear up is only restored in computer games, () vexd by their fraud as levels. The rejection of change and temporariness as values in their own right, of non-linear story telling as valid contemporary communicative and of the user defined journeying through information landscape as compelling experience strikes me as a very limited conception of digital new media, particularly as it is make in 2001. Or as Scott stroke puts it: civilisation has left its stead as representational an narrative and has become - as Benjamin guess - architectural. While I appreciate most people take away 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 alter 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. retributory how many computer users can edit WebPages or create various query interfaces to databases? The delay 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 amity of an observation Bolter and Grusin add to the discussion, Meanwhile, computer game makers hope that their interactive products testament 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 instance oriented interesting aspects Bolter and Grusins introduce, beside the already mentioned genealogy of remediation, are the consideration of the possibility that the propensity for immediacy, at to the lowest dot 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 everlastingly 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 scroll deals with the past instead of the now of reality, envisioning a still user; the stored media objects in turn become field of honor to retrieval and use. 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 dedicate structures; finally content and structure are presented as intertwined unity. This differs close from my accord of interfaces and their use: I do not view interfaces on the internet as digital representation of cultural artefacts as listed above, but compensate interfaces as an individual layer between the content (pictorial or textual) and the medium, the internet. In techno-culture the production of the engine room 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 acquaintance 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 / guile oriented colleges. Hence To ordain the medium is the message is to say that the engine room is the content, sits not in contrast with my design 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 engineering science 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 around 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 found 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. eve though he understands and explains the nature and structure of networks and its objects, he maps everything back to linearity and the limited stab view that comes with that. His design approach is expert and production centered, scatty 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 sell 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 united. For the truth is they have been united all along. In his interrogatory of interface culture, Stephen Johnson refers to Mcluhans instruction At no completion 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: secernate 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(a) Mcluhan, the medium is the message, Routledge, 1997 Lash Scott, criticism 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: Orderessay

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: How it works.