Imagelisation, image and landscapes

Since the 90 the media landscape changed completely. In 1994, major media companies, including corporations such as Hearst Corporation, which owned numerous American periodicals and television networks formed for the first time the so called “new media” divisions and trade groups such as the New York New media Association were organised. Around the same time, artists, curators and critics started to use the term “New Media Art” to refer to Works – such interactive multimédia installations, virtual reality environments and web-based art – that were made using digital technology. New Media art and older categorical names like “Digital Art”, “Computer art”, “Multimédia Art” and “Interactive Art”, Electronic art, Robotic art, Genomic art are often used interchangeably.

With the advances of the moving image production part of the moving image production, mainly video art is increasingly aimed at audiences that know about history of art, history of image, people that know about some mechanisms of the video art, film history and theory features. Part of this audience consists of professionals of image, artists themselves, filmakers, curators, and of course specific public. Nevertheless, vídeo art, moving images far from reducing their circle of influence it actually involves them more in all the subjects of the visual mechanisms of the present advanced knowledge and emotional disordered society, where the visual creativity is to be found in all activities and then extended to the way one visualizes the world, in a kind of strange one can say: “imagelisation”.

A paramount fact in all the image: film, vídeo art, new media production it is not whether or not a video art or moving image piece is economically successful in today’s market, but if it is the extent to which, in addition to having a practical purpose, its design includes a meaning that links its user to new possibilities, voices, the idea of interacting with those images within the vídeo art piece in the broad social network. In the end art, and mainly video art and moving image is, and always has been, an experimental laboratory of of visual / plastic representations and mainly powerful signs, symbols represented in analogic cathodic rays, digital pixels, digit numbers, search videos…

Living in a global, visual society in the age of advanced technology, Internet, and extreme paradoxes a kind of “imagelisation” has become an increasingly description. A powerful notion that stems from contemporary science where visualisation is about representation. When one talks about “imagelisation” one talks about visual landscapes, scenarios that one have the perception with the vision, the latin “video” and senses that are in this sense spatio-temporal organisation of complex data, meta data, meta images (images about images, or mediated by other images) in a computer, by search engines, mathematical algorithms, scrawlers. All of this in accordance with the assumed laws (or lack of laws in the complex world of the XXI Century where what nothing is what it seems to be) of this subject matter that may be rules, different kind of set ups: scientific, physics, economics, of the social life, and so forth.

However, the landscapes that we live in are created in one hand by the images produced by humans. These images are different from what images are supposed to show us, the little “piece” of the world in a certain environment, in the context of the factors that may influence its perception. Image landscapes are in this sense per se always plural and have a certain history and fictitious sense attached, or perhaps rather reality-suspended character created by the image of it, one had previously.

Then the context and definition of “Imagelisation” is about the possibilities of how to reflect about the aesthetics of the present and the future. Secondly, “imagelisation” seems in a certain sense to integrate the scientist-modeller as the interpreting observer on the same “stage” as the subject matter, not only as a vigilant interpreter but also an agency to be found topologically “on the stage” as a virtual viewpoint, a “camera”, or  “video” = “eye”.

In this sense, analysing the world by means of “imagelisation”, image and landscapes should imply a particular reflexivity, which not only befalls the represented but also all those instances which may determine its development. In a sense, what should be important to the observer on the stage of “imagelisation” is not the image / object, in this case movig image, as such but all those relations that this object reflects and which may possibly determine its development in the virtual environment. And in this case video arte and “imagelisation” is precisely about managing the perception of moving images, and the reflective set of relations the total of reality, the world and, of course the weight of humanity.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.