barebones communication

… a blog on communication

Barthes’ Connotation Procedures 1: Trick Effects. (Post 4 of 6)

Again I am referring to a recent post for an overview of what Roland Barthes has to say about connotation procedures in his article The Photographic Message from 1961.

Let me also explain the rather technical syntax for the titles of these posts. Barthes used the name connocations procedures (in the English translation that is). Each have a additional title and a number. The first precedure he actually talks about is trick effects, or how you can change the overall meaning content of a photography by “tricking” your way around. In my post chronology this is post 4 (of 6).

1. Trick effects

Imagine that a certain politician fell out of grace. You could simply remove him from the photograph without anyone noticing and still present the photo as a historical fact. Or you could add a person or two, change the background from indoor to outdoor. There are many ways that you can go about such a intent.

Trick effects can be crude like in the instances mentioned, or they can be minor when you change the saturation of a colour, do a simple straightening of a horizon, or just add a bit of contrast to the final image.

Barthes does not mention these last option in his article, but I will add them here, since image manipulation of this sort have increased severely over the years. With photo editor software, this is a piece of cake nowadays. Even removing or adding a person is fairly easy.

Go to any photo site on the internet, you will find heavily manipulated stuff all over. In fact you will find much more manipulated stuff then straight photography. Nothing wrong in that, as long as you are aware of what is going on. It is not always there for you to see at first glance. You may not like this, since it blurs the borders between “reality” and “fiction”, but I am afraid that you have to live with it. 

Bringing it down to basics; image manipulation might alter both the denotative and the connotative content of an image. Thus it is in Barthes’ term a connotation procedure.

In the picture you find below, you’ll see such a trick that Barthes is intending in his article. I have inserted the head of a woman into the lens this gentleman (whom I know well) looks through. Just for the fun of it :-)

I am sure that the effect does not escape you. Is the red lady “a picture in his mind”, or is it “something he looks for or desire?” Or something quite different, maybe. I will leave you do decide. Under any circumstance this insert has altered the meaning content of this image, would you not say? It is an example of Barthes trick effects in photography as a way to manipulate communication content.

Lady in Lens

Copyright 2003: Knut Skjærven. 

Library Thing. (Roland Barthes: Image, Music, Text, pages 15-31, Fontana Press 1977, UK. Essays selected and translated by Stephen Heath).

Buy the English translation of Barthes’ work. Follow the link and support the site:
Image-Music-Text

April 8, 2008 Posted by knut skjærven | semiology, toolbox | , , , , , , , , | No Comments

Barthes’ Connotation Procedures 4: Photogenia. (Post 3 of 6)

As mentioned in a recent post I will elaborate on Barthes’ connotation procedures in separate posts.

Here comes then the third of Barthes’ procedures: photogenia (actually his forth, but I treat them in a slighly different order). There are, according to Barthes, 6 areas of procedures in total. For Barthes’ wording you have to read his article. Reference is made at the bottom of the post.  

4. Photogenia 

Barthes: “In photogenia the connoted message is the image itself, “embellishes” (…)  by techniques of ligthing, exposure and printing”.

What is meant by this? Any catches here? Not as far as I can see. By using different light sources, exposure techniques, and printing you can direct and control the connotation of an image. Or at least you can try to do so.

And you might add other resources for photogenia: what kind of film or non film (digital) you use, what camera and what lenses you use, what development chemicals you use (if at all). And there are more, but I think that the point has been made.

How do you treat the image in post production is a very interesting issue nowadays since different image editors are so easy to come by. Adobe Photoshop is such an editor, and the one that has been use to alter the shot below. To embellish it.

This image, that is shot at a WWII cemetery in Normandy France, has been severely changes from the original. The original was shot in full daylight. The grass was green and the crosses were white. By tweaking in Adobe Photoshop I have altered the original connotations thereby hoping to bring out some other qualities inherent in the shot and at the cemetery. I have, in the words of Barthes “embellished” this shot so that it come out with another story than that originally told. 

Denotations are obviously crosses and ground. Connotations are more dramatic and point to the individual soldiers who lies buried at the cemetery. The title of the shot is Soul Prints.

soolprints600.jpg   

Soul Prints, Copyright 2008: Knut Skjærven.  

Library Thing. (Roland Barthes: Image, Music, Text, pages 15-31, Fontana Press 1977, UK. Essays selected and translated by Stephen Heath). 

Buy the English translation of Barthes’ work. Follow the link and support the site:
Image-Music-Text

April 2, 2008 Posted by knut skjærven | semiology, toolbox | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Barthes’ Connotation Procedures 2: Pose. (Post 2 of 6)

As mentioned in a recent post I will elaborate on Barthes’ connotation procedures in separate posts. Here comes then the second of Barthes’ procedures: pose.

There are, according to Barthes, 6 areas of procedures in total. For Barthes’ wording you have to read his article. Reference is made at the bottom of the post.

2. Pose

Barthes: “… it is the very pose of the subject which prepares the reading of the signifieds of connotation: youthfulness, spirituality, purity”. He says this in a discussion on a specific portrait of President John F. Kennedy from the beginning of the sixties.

Obviously a person’s, or an object’s, pose can change the meaning of a shot. Particularly on the connotative level. Does it change the impression if the person looks happy or sad, if he/her smiles or not, if he/she looks distantly up in the air, or keep eyes towards the ground? Of course it does, as do any other compositional change in the picture.

Pose then, or in more general terms, composition, is a connotation procedure. It is one of the element that you can use for inducing a specific set of meanings in a photographic message.

Here is an example. In this shot the denotative elements are the two young people, the glass cylinder, the large window in the back of the image, the brick walls, et cetera. By placing themselves, as they did, around the glass cylinder the young couple added greatly to the content of this shot by inducing playfulness, joy, happiness just to mention a few such attributes. These are the picture’s connotations. For more on connotations (and denotations) you could go here.

The Glass House, Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Humlebæk, Denmark.

Copyright 2008: Knut Skjærven. 

Library Thing. (Roland Barthes: Image, Music, Text, pages 15-31, Fontana Press 1977, UK. Essays selected and translated by Stephen Heath).

Buy the English translation of Barthes’ work. Follow the link and support the site:
Image-Music-Text

April 2, 2008 Posted by knut skjærven | semiology, semiotics, toolbox | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment