Hello,
I was very interested in this question; my doctorate investigated the intersection of photography and information design (for example, Google Map’s composite satellite photography or the chronophotography of Marey).
I’m not convinced photography is design.
Photographs themselves are ontologically tricky. Does a photograph require resemblance to function? If not, can any permanent information created by light be considered a photograph? I’d say no, it is important it is perceived as a purposefully created image.
So, if intentionality is required for an image to be considered photographic then we’re beginning to move towards something akin to a designerly action, but I’m not sure that’s design.
David Green and Joanna Lowry are very good on the subject, they develop the photograph’s meaning beyond just the subject depicted, describing: ‘The very act of photography as a kind of performative gesture which points to an event in the world’ (2003: 48). In a later publication they argue it is perhaps safer to characterise the photograph as being about “pointing” at things, as a kind of “performative utterance”– a process of designation (Green & Lowry, 2006).
I’m not convinced “pointing” at things is design in-of-itself. It’s a very broad definition of design if designation is enough. Photography can certainly be a useful tool within many design activities though, particularly in communication design.
Best wishes,
Rob
Dr Rob Tovey
Senior Lecturer & Course Director BA Graphic Design
Coventry University
Faculty of Arts and Humanities
School of Art and Design
Priory Street
Coventry CV1 5FB
024 7688 8528
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|