지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
There are various ways to perceive the world. Among these ways, seeing occupies the predominant position in the contemporary society. To know the world, first of all, we should see the world. But in the contemporary society, we do not exactly see the world. We see the images. Maybe we see the world, but we see it through images. Through images, we see and know the things that we have never met and the places in which we have never been. That's why we call the contemporary society 'society of image'.
The image is a material product. Man makes images to represent things in the world. So when we see a image, we see a thing representing something in the world. As the seen, the image has the same position as the world: the image and the world as the seen are the object faced with the subject(the seer).
But the image is not a simple object to see. It is a representation. The image represents the object for the subject. It is a medium standing between seer and seen, between subject and object. Being separated from the seen by the image, the seer becomes the subject. This distance is epistemological.
As a materiel product made by man, the image has its own material existence distinct from the others. Among different images, we can distinguish three types by their materiality: conventional image, optical image and digital image.
The conventional image like painting refers to its object by the resemblance. We accept that the conventional image represents its object because it resembles its object. But this resemblance is not necessary. It is done by the social iconic convention.
The optical image like photography is the traces left by the existence of its object. So the optical image represents its object and proves the existence of its object. Both the conventional image and the optical image are the representation of its object. They have the object to which they refer.
The digital image is quite different from those two images. It does not represent its object but presents itself. It does not refer to something other. It simulates its own existence. It has not any object to which it refer.
The conventional image and the optical image represent a real or imaginary world supposed to exist elsewhere. They function as screen between seeing subject and world. Through those images, the world becomes a object to observe, to possess, and to exploit. The conventional image with the geometric perspective and the optical image with the camera make the subject a distant observer.
The digital image presents a world that exists here and now as long as it is played. The digital image presents a world that seems to exist on its own. The experience of this world brought by the digital image seems to make some troubles in our relation with the world. The doubt about the existence of the world in which we live is enlarged.
We see the world through the image. It means that we see what the image shows even without knowing to which the image refers exists as such. But with the conventional image and the optical image, we are invited to believe in the existence of the real world. Now the digital image destroys this belief.
The image is a material product. Man makes images to represent things in the world. So when we see a image, we see a thing representing something in the world. As the seen, the image has the same position as the world: the image and the world as the seen are the object faced with the subject(the seer).
But the image is not a simple object to see. It is a representation. The image represents the object for the subject. It is a medium standing between seer and seen, between subject and object. Being separated from the seen by the image, the seer becomes the subject. This distance is epistemological.
As a materiel product made by man, the image has its own material existence distinct from the others. Among different images, we can distinguish three types by their materiality: conventional image, optical image and digital image.
The conventional image like painting refers to its object by the resemblance. We accept that the conventional image represents its object because it resembles its object. But this resemblance is not necessary. It is done by the social iconic convention.
The optical image like photography is the traces left by the existence of its object. So the optical image represents its object and proves the existence of its object. Both the conventional image and the optical image are the representation of its object. They have the object to which they refer.
The digital image is quite different from those two images. It does not represent its object but presents itself. It does not refer to something other. It simulates its own existence. It has not any object to which it refer.
The conventional image and the optical image represent a real or imaginary world supposed to exist elsewhere. They function as screen between seeing subject and world. Through those images, the world becomes a object to observe, to possess, and to exploit. The conventional image with the geometric perspective and the optical image with the camera make the subject a distant observer.
The digital image presents a world that exists here and now as long as it is played. The digital image presents a world that seems to exist on its own. The experience of this world brought by the digital image seems to make some troubles in our relation with the world. The doubt about the existence of the world in which we live is enlarged.
We see the world through the image. It means that we see what the image shows even without knowing to which the image refers exists as such. But with the conventional image and the optical image, we are invited to believe in the existence of the real world. Now the digital image destroys this belief.
목차
1. 들어가며
2. 근대성과 탈근대성
3. 시각과 영상
4. 세 가지 형태의 영상들
5. 영상을 통해 드러나는 근대성과 탈근대성
6. 결론을 대신해서
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
국가이미지가 관광지 이미지와 재방문 의도에 미치는 영향 : 국가이미지 개념 간 비교를 중심으로
관광레저연구
2017 .05
-
관광지 인지적, 정서적, 전반적 이미지에 관한 연구 : 아산시를 중심으로
관광연구논총
2012 .02
-
한국 국가이미지와 기업이미지간의 상호효과에 대한 실증연구 : 삼성전자의 중국소비자를 중심으로
통상정보연구
2006 .12
-
세계에 대한 한국인의 이미지와 한국에 대한 세계의 이미지 ( The South Korean Image of the World and the World Image of Korea )
대한지리학회지
1991 .08
-
중국 인바운드 관광객의 여행행동특성에 따른 한국관광이미지 인식차이 분석
호텔리조트연구
2018 .01
-
현대사회의 영상물의 새로운 조건과 영상에 대한 새로운 정의에 대한 연구 : 존버거의 ‘영상과 이미지 언어의 내용을 중심으로
문화산업연구
2004 .12
-
ヘルスツーリズムのイメージに関する探索的な研究 : 韓ㆍ日大学生の比較を中心に
관광레저연구
2007 .02
-
21세기 이미지 시론을 위한시 교육 방법론 연구
동아시아문화연구
2019 .01
-
관광목적지로서의 부산 이미지에 관한 연구
관광레저연구
2006 .08
-
외국인 관광객의 구매의도에 영향을 미치는 호텔의 정서적ㆍ물리적 이미지 연구 : 비즈니스 호텔을 중심으로
관광레저연구
2015 .11
-
人的서비스의 Image 제고를 위한 10S' 원칙에 관한 연구
관광레저연구
1997 .12
-
요인분석과 쌍대척도법을 이용한 제품이미지 평가 방법론
의사결정학연구
2005 .12
-
온라인에서 대형마트 쇼핑몰의 이미지가 신뢰를 매개로 만족에 미치는 영향
유통과학연구
2014 .01
-
The Structural Relationship about Country Image and Corporate Image of Exporting Goods under Global Trade Environment
무역상무연구
2012 .12
-
관광지 선택행동에 직접적인 영향을 미치는 이미지의 도출에 관한 연구 : 단순선호이미지와 선도이미지의 비교를 중심으로
관광레저연구
2005 .09
-
韓国の日本語教科書にみられる韓国イメージ
일본언어문화
2017 .01
-
지방 관광 이미지에 대한 방문자 인식의 Q방법론적 접근: 포천 지역을 대상으로
관광경영연구
2020 .01
-
관광지 이미지가 방문객 만족도와 행동의도에 미치는 영향- 여수 관광지를 중심으로 -
관광경영연구
2013 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0