At a recent conference, speaker Dr James Hanvey SJ used the phrase 'images without depth' in a discussion of values in a digital age, and it really struck a chord with something that has been on my mind recently.
'Images without depth' refers, it seems, to the transient and fleeting nature of images in the fast and free world of new media.
We grab images from google to brighten up a piece of text, or use some clipart to make a space look more vibrant. We can be tempted to use images to illustrate a point without taking on board the full value of those images.
Every image is in theory rich with depth and connotation, connected via references and resemblances which endow meaning and significance. Images are not shallow but speak of what lies at their source.
Yet with the need for quick eye catching content, especially on the web, we can so often ignore or forget this fact. Furthermore, the abundance of images and the ease of access make it all too tempting to pull up something that will 'do the job' without thinking our choices through.
After all, it will probably only by viewed for a few hours, until the next story takes its place. Who can be blamed for only giving passing thought to the image choice?
But what does that image really represent? What is it an image of? What are the implicit statements being made by that particular choice? - questions that shouldn't in my opinion, be ignored.
Not only do we run the risk of devaluing and trivialising the use images in the media (and elsewhere), but we also have ethical issues to face: have I done justice to the true depth of the images I have used? Do they help to tell the truth, or just to catch the eye and meet the deadline?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment