It is sometimes argued that we live in a society of the image, which has always seemed dubious. I have the impression of a company's text, which is sometimes shown in the picture. Newspapers TV, for example, do me the effect of radio news bulletins with illustrations above: the unused capacity of the medium seem as if we did not know what to do with all that screen and we would just flatten things that move on the words. Similarly, I am surprised when we speak of cinema as a filmed theater where the acting and screenplay are all, while the staging and editing are just a gimmick (or, worse an effect as if such a thing could not be serious). Certainly, what I said was nothing new, I am aware.
Wikipedia is an online text. It is because of technical limitations inherent in the wiki. It is also because the image of the Encyclopedia of Epinal guess the write words. It still is, In my opinion, because Wikipedia is an offshoot of the early days of the Web, where sites were described in the text. For all these reasons, sound, image, video, animation, music, diagrams, graphs, curves, diagrams, partitions, all are merely illustrations: a product is never built around them.
However, it is possible to convey a real message encyclopedic outside pure text as an example of figurative map Minard shows. But I am guilty. In this masterpiece of synthetic representation, I laid an infamous text summary . There is no exception.
0 comments:
Post a Comment