Ana Peraica
is the author of The Age of Total Images (Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam, 2019), Fotografija kao dokaz (Multimedijalni Institut, Zagreb, 2018), Culture of the Selfie (Institute of Networked Cultures, Amsterdam, 2017) and an editor of readers made after large exhibition projects, such as; Machine Philosopher (Jan Van Eyck Akademie, Maastricht, 1999), Žena na raskrižju ideologija (HULU, Split, 2007), Victims Symptom – PTSD and Culture (Institute of Networked Cultures, Amsterdam, 2009), Smuggling Anthologies (Museum of Modern and Contemporary Arts, Rijeka, 2015). She also authored chapters in readers published by Routledge, Palgrave Macmillan, Springer, Sage, Bloomsbury, Afterall/MIT Press, and other academic publishers. She also publishes with journals as Leonardo, Afterimage, Philosophy of Photography, Photographies and magazines as Springerin, Membrana, or projects as Art and Education Papers, Documenta magazine.
She is currently a Visiting Professor at Danube University Krems, and was recently a Visiting Fellow at Central European University in Budapest.
Supervisors: Prof. Mieke Bal, Prof. Johnny de Philo, Prof. Elvio Baccarini, and Prof. Sarat Maharaj
Address: Peristil bb
21 000 Split
Croatia
She is currently a Visiting Professor at Danube University Krems, and was recently a Visiting Fellow at Central European University in Budapest.
Supervisors: Prof. Mieke Bal, Prof. Johnny de Philo, Prof. Elvio Baccarini, and Prof. Sarat Maharaj
Address: Peristil bb
21 000 Split
Croatia
less
InterestsView All (32)
Uploads
Books by Ana Peraica
By tracing visual representations of the planet across Western history and culture, Peraica provides support for a media-based explanation behind the reappearance of flat Earth theories. Through an adventurous exploration of the ways the Earth has been represented in sculptural globes, landscape painting, aerial photography, and even new media art, she proposes that a significant reason for the reemergence today in the belief that the world is flat lies in processes and practices of representation which flatten it during the compositing of photographs into ‘total images’. Such images, Peraica argues, are principally characterized by the disappearance of the subjective point of view and angle of view from photography, as the perspectival tool of the camera is being replaced with the technical perspective of the map, and human perception with machine vision, within a polyperspectival assemblage. In the media constellation of these total images, photography is but one layer of visual information among many, serving not to represent some part of the Earth, but to provide an illusion of realism.
ISBN: 978-90-78146-11-7.
Chapters by Ana Peraica
Papers by Ana Peraica
By tracing visual representations of the planet across Western history and culture, Peraica provides support for a media-based explanation behind the reappearance of flat Earth theories. Through an adventurous exploration of the ways the Earth has been represented in sculptural globes, landscape painting, aerial photography, and even new media art, she proposes that a significant reason for the reemergence today in the belief that the world is flat lies in processes and practices of representation which flatten it during the compositing of photographs into ‘total images’. Such images, Peraica argues, are principally characterized by the disappearance of the subjective point of view and angle of view from photography, as the perspectival tool of the camera is being replaced with the technical perspective of the map, and human perception with machine vision, within a polyperspectival assemblage. In the media constellation of these total images, photography is but one layer of visual information among many, serving not to represent some part of the Earth, but to provide an illusion of realism.
ISBN: 978-90-78146-11-7.
The first model is the Suprematist model of image reduction, reducing images on formal level of visuality. The second model is the one of Pop art, based on semiotic reduction of the image.
Neither of these art historic movements has left traces in photographic history, especially not in the history of photo-montage in direct way, though both are participating as general models of image manipulation, deepening relationships among the film montage (editing) and visual editing used in marketing, based on visual arts. The analysis shows a direct relationship of Russian montage and suprematism, as well as Pop art and marketing.
As the third model, aside Suprematist and Pop-Artist reduction of visuality, yet another historic model is analyzed – MTV aesthetic, which is a product of editing techniques and distributive models of marketing. This model, contrary to two basic ones is hybrid.
Definitions of physical constraints in production of the photographic image (lenses, focus, aperture, exposure...) are used to provide technical descriptions of the image, rather than descriptive, showing how they work in the production of emotion. A set of technical differences is found in records of scaffolds, the most important being; the type of lenses and approximate distance to the scene... De-focusing and the implementation of telephoto lenses, as for example, allows bridging large distances between the author and the scene, this choice of technology can be seen as a result of fear with the immediate physical contact with a scaffold. In parallel, the implementation of wide lenses and precise, sharp, focus in the same theme can be seen as a will to face the horror of it. Spatial treatment of the author within the scene, defined via lenses and focus, are connected to different interpretations of such images, as a close psychoanalytic or a distant political.
institutionalized may provoke or support and even increase the production of new fatalities.
None of Nancy’s relations works with portraits of people generated by Generative Adversarial Networks. For example, in This Person does not Exist, as no comparing subject to any of these images. At the same time, a creator is a machine (Helfand 2019). Yet, this problem can be solved with object-oriented ontologies. According to these ontologies, still, even objects that are not strictly “things” (or physical) exist, in a certain way. Or as Graham Harman, the author of the theory of OOO flamboyantly describes; “along with diamonds, rope and neutrons, objects may include armies, monsters, square circles and leagues of real
o retrato
• on
portraiture 211
and fictitious nations.” (Harman 2011, 66-67). So is true with “people who do not exist” - they do exist for everyone who is incapable of distinguishing their physical presence (or can experience individual existence remotely), and that is especially convincing in photographic medium as we are used that – whatever is photographed necessarily exists. Such objects, which do not refer to physical things, but are rather ideas Francois Laruelle names a photo-fiction, defining “a new type of object, about adding fiction to the photo according to a precise logic, without imitation or dialectics, and then elucidating its structure” (Laruelle 2012, 12). Such objects are not made by adding photographs but by “generating fictions that are alike “theoretical captions” (ibid).
Both types of objects construct the world, which, according to Laruelle, is named a photosphere (Laruelle, 2011). Thus, both real portraits and generated ones create the sphere of portraiture.
role of photographic (self)recording, but
also for manoeuvring the space behind one's
own back. Unfortunately, as two realities,
the unmediated and mediated, human and
machine vision, are not matching, there are
many accidents of selfie-makers due to the
crabwalk. By this, the photographic technology
based on the rear-view mirror – in which
objects (may) appear closer than they are –
finally resolves one of the largest tragedies of
human self-perception; the inability to see and
control the world behind one's back.
the analysis of paintings based on photographs, the article distinguishes several specificities that photography has introduced into visual reception, changing the history of methods in painting, graphics and other visual media. These specificities are; a change to technical and monocular
perspective, intriguing perspectives and view angles, effects of lens distortions, fragmentation of gaze, description through multiple details of time succession, atomization of a scene, deep counterlight and halation of objects in counter light, stillness without stiffness of posing, halted and frozen movement, unusual image cropping, perspective bokeh, combination printing and retouching.
unpredictability of the distribution.
Basing a differentiation on historic layers of pre-modern, modern and postmodern relationship to self, being conditioned and framed with technology, I will try to analyze a shift
occurring in visual self-perception, analyzing changes of visual paradigms, since pre-modern times. These technologies are; camera obscura, photocamera, compact camera and mobile phone camera.
Contrary to the times of camera obscura in which a subject was defining the space, or the subjectivised space of photo technologies, in selfie enabled technologies, subject and the object appear and at the same time; are – the same.
The multi-focality of a total image is not corresponding to natural human perception, but rather messing it, offering a disinterested and thus non-alive view. Impartial and basically dead, such a view is all but innocent. It is rather a symptom of a new politics of control that cannot be challenged as it acts as if asleep, and cannot be fought against as it is - already dead, convincing us nothing is going on.