<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Drawing on the application of C. S. Peirce’s notion of indexicality, this paper argues that iterative imaging technologies modulate the manner in which moving images represent reality and determine how they are traced back to that referent. Rather than subscribing to the canonical divergence between analogue and digital technologies, the paper argues that current moving image theories do not sufficiently acknowledge the granularity of technology when describing indexical relationships between moving images and the reality they represent. Despite a shared use of analogue technologies, film’s technique of fixing a full frame of movement to a momentarily static strip of light-sensitive celluloid or Mylar is profoundly different from analogue video’s parsing of the image frame to its constituent parts and then recording this signal to continuously moving tape or broadcasting the resulting images. These are particularities of technique and technology, not easily ranked in terms of verisimilitude. The paper concludes that despite a widely accepted indexical analogue/digital divide, the indexical status of analogue video is no different to that of digital video images because both consist of discrete and non-continuous picture elements.</p></abstract>

Drawing on the application of C. S. Peirce’s notion of indexicality, this paper argues that iterative imaging technologies modulate the manner in which moving images represent reality and determine how they are traced back to that referent. Rather than subscribing to the canonical divergence between analogue and digital technologies, the paper argues that current moving image theories do not sufficiently acknowledge the granularity of technology when describing indexical relationships between moving images and the reality they represent. Despite a shared use of analogue technologies, film’s technique of fixing a full frame of movement to a momentarily static strip of light-sensitive celluloid or Mylar is profoundly different from analogue video’s parsing of the image frame to its constituent parts and then recording this signal to continuously moving tape or broadcasting the resulting images. These are particularities of technique and technology, not easily ranked in terms of verisimilitude. The paper concludes that despite a widely accepted indexical analogue/digital divide, the indexical status of analogue video is no different to that of digital video images because both consist of discrete and non-continuous picture elements.

Indexicality or Technological Intermediate? Moving Image Representation, Materiality, and the Real

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Film and Media Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Drawing on the application of C. S. Peirce’s notion of indexicality, this paper argues that iterative imaging technologies modulate the manner in which moving...

Indexicality or Technological Intermediate? Moving Image Representation, Materiality, and the Real

Published Online: Sep 24, 2016

Page range: 191 - 209

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ausfm-2016-0010

Keywords
C. S. Peirce, indexicality, reality, analogue video, imaging technologies

© 2016 James Verdon, published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Indexicality or Technological Intermediate? Moving Image Representation, Materiality, and the Real

Published Online: Sep 24, 2016

Page range: 191 - 209

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ausfm-2016-0010

KeywordsC. S. Peirce, indexicality, reality, analogue video, imaging technologies

© 2016 James Verdon, published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Keywords
C. S. Peirce, indexicality, reality, analogue video, imaging technologies