浅谈手机摄影外国文献
外文
The camera phone deserves a prominent position in the study of photography, as a rapidly increasing share of cameras are nowadays placed in phones and also other telecommunication devices, such as tablet computers. This is not only about the emergence of new photographic devices, but the emergence of such devices that radically alter the ways in which photographs can be communicated and, thus, can potentially also affect photography itself. Therefore, a focal goal in the article is to integrate the study of photography with mobile communication studies.
The mobile phone has received minor attention in communication and new media studies, and humanities and social sciences in general (Goggin,“Cultural Studies of Mobile Communication” 353; Oksman), compared to its huge popularity and ubiqui- tous nature. Similarly, study on vernacular photography, such as family photography, has been negligible when compared to professional photographic practices (Price and Wells 17). Despite several notable exceptions (such as Spence and Holland; Hirsch; Rose; Proslash;itz; Larsen and Sandbye; Sarvas and Frohlich), the ordinary photographs captured by everyday folk have been mostly excluded from the studies, and most research has focused on the artistic ambitions of the medium
In this context, it can be understood why researchers have not previously given
camera phones the attention they deserve (David 96), despite the fact that the advent of camera phones has been very rapid during the last ten years. Yet camera phones are gradually becoming an object of study for scholars writing on photography (e.g. Goacute;mez Cruz and Meyer; Rubinstein and Sluis; Palmer; David; Rantavuo; Proslash;itz; Wagner). In order to contribute further to the field, I focus expressly on camera phone photographs as a communication medium. Thereby, this article contributes also to the discussion on mobile communication (Ito et al.; Goggin, Cell Phone Culture; Katz; Ling, New Tech, New Ties).
I argue that mediating presence visually is an integral practice of using photographs in mobile communication — although, naturally, not the only one. The idea of mediating presence by using camera phone photographs has been brought up earlier in several studies (e.g. Mauml;kelauml; et al. 553–54; Koskinen et al. 78; Riviegrave;re 174, 183; Scifo, “The Domestication” 368; Lillie; Satchell and Graham 256; van Dijck,“Digital photography 72; Lehmuskallio 292). My intention now is to discuss mediated presence more extensively in the context of the study of photography.
In the first part of the article, I outline my perspective by discussing mediated presence in relation to mobile communication, photography and the communication of photographs with camera phones. In the latter part, I complement the theoretical insights with actual examples of camera phone communication from a study of Finnish camera phone users.
Notably, presence is a theme that is also focal to many writings on photography. In fact, presence — and absence — can be said to have always been the constitutive core of photography. A photograph mediates presence by conveying the presence of the absent, the object or person captured in the photograph. A photograph is both a “pseudo-presence” and a “token of absence” (Sontag 16). In this sense, photographs offer presence-in-absence.
The writings on photography have generally regarded presence in photography as relating to the “that-has-been”, presence being subject to the passing of time. According to Barthes, a photograph does not establish a consciousness of the “being- there” of the object in the photograph, but an awareness of its “having-been-there” (Image, Music, Text 44). In his essay “Rhetoric of the Image”, Barthes presents a specific space–time category for photographs: spatial immediacy and temporal anteriority, “the photograph being an illogical conjunction between the here-now and the there-then” (Image, Music, Text 44). According to Green and Lowry, the overriding experience of the “what has been” and the countervailing force of what we see also being unques- tionably “present” are merged in a photograph .
In the presence mediated by a photograph, of importance is the indexical relation, the physical trace between the photograph and the object or place photographed. Barthes notes that every photograph is a certificate of presence, “literally an emanation of the referent”; the fact that the photographed object has been there is the essence of photography (Camera Lucida 80, 87). Photographs are images produced as a conse- quence of being directly affected by the objects to which they refer (Batchen, Forget Me Not 31). There is always a presumption that something exists in the place, or did exist, which then is depicted in the picture
What is it then that the camera phone adds to the presence mediated by any photograph? Most importantly, the camera phone brings in the quasi-simultaneous character of the mobile connection to the communication of photographs: the sender of the photograph can mediate presence purposefully over distance, not over time. Then the photograph forms a connection between there-now and here-now, instead of mediating the there-then to here-now. This is in contrast to Sontagrsquo;s notion that with photographs the other cannot possess the present, but only the past (163). Barthes, although stating that a photograph is a “certificate of presence” (Camera Lucida, 87), argues that “a photograph is in no way a presence”, for “in every photograph there is the always stupefying evidence of this is how it was” (Image, Music, Text 44; see also Price and Wells 44). When Barthes notes that the photograph is in no way a presence, he is referring especially to the presence in time, or the lack of it in photography (in his time). A printed photograph in a family album is not an index of the family members gathering to celebr
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
浅谈手机摄影外国文献
外文
The camera phone deserves a prominent position in the study of photography, as a rapidly increasing share of cameras are nowadays placed in phones and also other telecommunication devices, such as tablet computers. This is not only about the emergence of new photographic devices, but the emergence of such devices that radically alter the ways in which photographs can be communicated and, thus, can potentially also affect photography itself. Therefore, a focal goal in the article is to integrate the study of photography with mobile communication studies.
The mobile phone has received minor attention in communication and new media studies, and humanities and social sciences in general (Goggin,“Cultural Studies of Mobile Communication” 353; Oksman), compared to its huge popularity and ubiqui- tous nature. Similarly, study on vernacular photography, such as family photography, has been negligible when compared to professional photographic practices (Price and Wells 17). Despite several notable exceptions (such as Spence and Holland; Hirsch; Rose; Proslash;itz; Larsen and Sandbye; Sarvas and Frohlich), the ordinary photographs captured by everyday folk have been mostly excluded from the studies, and most research has focused on the artistic ambitions of the medium
In this context, it can be understood why researchers have not previously given
camera phones the attention they deserve (David 96), despite the fact that the advent of camera phones has been very rapid during the last ten years. Yet camera phones are gradually becoming an object of study for scholars writing on photography (e.g. Goacute;mez Cruz and Meyer; Rubinstein and Sluis; Palmer; David; Rantavuo; Proslash;itz; Wagner). In order to contribute further to the field, I focus expressly on camera phone photographs as a communication medium. Thereby, this article contributes also to the discussion on mobile communication (Ito et al.; Goggin, Cell Phone Culture; Katz; Ling, New Tech, New Ties).
I argue that mediating presence visually is an integral practice of using photographs in mobile communication — although, naturally, not the only one. The idea of mediating presence by using camera phone photographs has been brought up earlier in several studies (e.g. Mauml;kelauml; et al. 553–54; Koskinen et al. 78; Riviegrave;re 174, 183; Scifo, “The Domestication” 368; Lillie; Satchell and Graham 256; van Dijck,“Digital photography 72; Lehmuskallio 292). My intention now is to discuss mediated presence more extensively in the context of the study of photography.
In the first part of the article, I outline my perspective by discussing mediated presence in relation to mobile communication, photography and the communication of photographs with camera phones. In the latter part, I complement the theoretical insights with actual examples of camera phone communication from a study of Finnish camera phone users.
Notably, presence is a theme that is also focal to many writings on photography. In fact, presence — and absence — can be said to have always been the constitutive core of photography. A photograph mediates presence by conveying the presence of the absent, the object or person captured in the photograph. A photograph is both a “pseudo-presence” and a “token of absence” (Sontag 16). In this sense, photographs offer presence-in-absence.
The writings on photography have generally regarded presence in photography as relating to the “that-has-been”, presence being subject to the passing of time. According to Barthes, a photograph does not establish a consciousness of the “being- there” of the object in the photograph, but an awareness of its “having-been-there” (Image, Music, Text 44). In his essay “Rhetoric of the Image”, Barthes presents a specific space–time category for photographs: spatial immediacy and temporal anteriority, “the photograph being an illogical conjunction between the here-now and the there-then” (Image, Music, Text 44). According to Green and Lowry, the overriding experience of the “what has been” and the countervailing force of what we see also being unques- tionably “present” are merged in a photograph .
In the presence mediated by a photograph, of importance is the indexical relation, the physical trace between the photograph and the object or place photographed. Barthes notes that every photograph is a certificate of presence, “literally an emanation of the referent”; the fact that the photographed object has been there is the essence of photography (Camera Lucida 80, 87). Photographs are images produced as a conse- quence of being directly affected by the objects to which they refer (Batchen, Forget Me Not 31). There is always a presumption that something exists in the place, or did exist, which then is depicted in the picture
What is it then that the camera phone adds to the presence mediated by any photograph? Most importantly, the camera phone brings in the quasi-simultaneous character of the mobile connection to the communication of photographs: the sender of the photograph can mediate presence purposefully over distance, not over time. Then the photograph forms a connection between there-now and here-now, instead of mediating the there-then to here-now. This is in contrast to Sontagrsquo;s notion that with photographs the other cannot possess the present, but only the past (163). Barthes, although stating that a photograph is a “certificate of presence” (Camera Lucida, 87), argues that “a photograph is in no way a presence”, for “in every photograph there is the always stupefying evidence of this is how it was” (Image, Music, Text 44; see also Price and Wells 44). When Barthes notes that the photograph is in no way a presence, he is referring especially to the presence in time, or the lack of it in photography (in his time). A printed photograph in a family album is not an index of the family members gathering to celebr
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[482580]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
