Augmented Reality

Augmented Reality

Related Content

Comments

37 responses to “Augmented Reality”

  1. Wonderful path here. It strikes me how revealing you have made the instability of language. Clearly, there is enough image remaining for us to recognize the tree objects without the labels. Yet the labels being applied, we see that the objects are not actually what we agree upon to represent the word tree. They are blobs of color and shape, not trees (and as image never really trees but reproductions of trees in two dimensions).The cars do not match our understanding of an image of a car (though without the label we can get to the car concept on our own). Wall and street the same. House, however, is interesting. We see buildings that, for me, do not fit the residential occupancy style of a house. They must be wealthy residents but the image (without the label) takes me to something other than house. With the label, I struggle for understanding. If we walked the label even further from the norm, say, “den” or “place” we would come to a clearer vision of how the labels blur reality as much as the photographic effect. If we label the “house” as “lego” we then impose a new reality upon all the objects as we would have to rethink whether the cars, blurred as they are, are in fact toys. The one label which actually represents everything accurately, both the labels and the images, is “sign”. Words are signs of ideas and images are signs that signify three dimensional experience. Thanks for the epiphany.

    Like

    • Thank you, Vassilis.
      Though I read some Flusser in the 90s at the university – I don’t really have any recollection…
      …I think I still have one of his books though. Maybe I should take another look.

      Like

Leave a reply to rabirius Cancel reply

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