Advertisement

Screenshots as Virtual Photography

Cybernetics, Remediation, and Affect
  • Christopher Moore

Abstract

Screenshots are a ubiquitous form of visual communication online and off. They are common across the Web, in print and televisual media, where such images are required to provide evidence of screen activity. Critical analysis of screenshots as digital tools and media objects has rarely been attempted in media studies and the digital humanities, but these disciplines offer powerful and complimentary means for examining the assumptions embedded in their form and function. In this chapter I couple the investigation of screenshots as a convergence of old and new media technologies with the emerging processes for data analysis and network visualization. I seek to augment the hermeneutic and phenomenological interpretation of screenshots by drawing on the new tools for gathering quantitative information and mapping patterns of their circulation online. I take digital game screenshots as the primary subject of inquiry and consider them as a form of virtual photography, examining the role of cybernetics, remediation, and affect in their production and distribution. This study employs the open source network visualization tool NodeXL to expand the theoretical and qualitative investigation by graphing the deployment of game screenshots across two social media sites, Twitter and Flickr. The results presented here demonstrate details of Flickr screenshot tagging practices and the use of screenshots in Twitter profile images as two examples of participation in networked digital game cultures and the individual expression of online persona.

Keywords

Virtual World Media Object Social Media Site Digital Tool Digital Game 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Works cited

  1. Barbour, Kim. (2013). ‘Hiding in Plain Sight: Street Artists Online’. Journal of Media and Communication 5, no. 1: 86–96.Google Scholar
  2. Barbour, Kim, and David Marshall. (2012). ‘The Academic Online: Constructing Persona Through the World Wide Web’. First Monday 17, nos. 9–3. Available at: http://firstmonday.org.
  3. Berry, David. (2012). ‘Introduction: Understanding the Digital Humanities’. In Understanding Digital Humanities, ed. David M. Berry, 1–20. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin. (1999). Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, Julie. (2012). Configuring the Networked Self. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cranny-Francis, Anne. (2005). Multimedia: Texts and Contexts. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cubitt, Sean. (2000). ‘Cybertime: Ontologies of Digital Perception’. Society for Cinema Studies, Chicago, March. Available at: http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au.
  8. Derrida, Jacques. (1981). ‘Economimesis’. Diacritics 11, no. 6: 2–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Emirbayer, Mustafa, and Jeff Goodwin. (1994). ‘Network Analysis, Culture and the Problem of Agency’. American Journal of Sociology 99, no. 6: 1411–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foucault, Michel. (1966/2012). The Order of Things: An Archeology of the Human Sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Gephi. (2013). Gephi Consortium. Available at: http://gephi.org/.Google Scholar
  12. Gibbs, Anna. (2001). ‘Contagious Feelings: Pauline Hans and the Epidemiology of Affect’. Australian Humanities Review 24. Available at: http://www.australianhumanitiesreview.org/archive/Issue-December-2001/gibbs.html.
  13. Grey, J. (2010). Show Sold Separately: Promos, Spoilers and Other Media Paratexts. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hansen, Derek L., Ben Shneiderman, and Marc A. Smith. (2011). Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL: Insights from a Connected World. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kauffman.Google Scholar
  15. Harel, David, and Yehuda Koren. (2001). ‘A Fast Multi-Scale Method for Drawing Large Graphs’. Available at: http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il.
  16. Hayles, Katherine. (2010). ‘Cybernetics’. In Critical Terms for Media Studies, ed. W. J. T. Mitchel and Mark Hansen. Kindle ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hayles, N. Katherine. (2012). How We Think: Digital Media and Contemporary Technogenesis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee, Rainie, and Barry Wellman. (2012). Networked: The New Social Operating System. Kindle ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Liu, Alan. (2011). ‘Friending the Past: The Sense of History and Social Computing’. New Literary History 42, no. 1: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu, Alan. (2012). ‘The State of the Digital Humanities: A Report and a Critique’. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 11, no. 8: 8–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manovich, Lev. (2009). ‘Cultural Analytics: Visualising Cultural Patterns in the Era of “More Media”’. Domus (Spring). Available at: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsoftwarestudies.com%2Fcultural_analytics%2FManovich_DOMUS.doc.
  22. Manovich, Lev. (2012a). ‘How to Follow Software Users’. Softwarestudies.com, March. Available at: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.softwarestudies.Error! Hyperlink reference not valid..
  23. Manovich, Lev. (2012b). ‘How to Compare One Million Images?’ In Understanding Digital Humanities, ed. David M. Berry, 249–98. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marshall, P. D. (2010). ‘Persona Studies: The Proliferation of the Public Self’. Opening Public Lecture, Celebrity News: An Oxymoron, international conference, Geneva, Switzerland: University of Geneva, 15 September.Google Scholar
  25. Marshall, P. D. (2013). ‘Persona Studies: Mapping the Proliferation of the Public Self’. Journalism, 2 June. Available at: http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/05/28/1464884913488720.abstract.
  26. Massumi, Brian. (2002). Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Melberg, Arne. (1995). Theories of Mimesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moore, Christopher. (2010). ‘Hats of Affect: A Study of Affect, Achievements and Hats in Team Fortress 2’. Game Studies 11, no. 1. Available at: http://gamestudies.org/1101/articles/moore.
  29. Moore, Christopher. (2011). ‘The Magic Circle and the Mobility of Play’. Convergence 17, no. 4: 373–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moore, Christopher. (2012). ‘Invigorating Play: The Role of Affect in Online Multiplayer FPS Game’. In Guns, Grenades, and Grunts: First-Person Shooter Games, ed. Gerald A. Voorhees, Josh Call, and Katie Whitlock, 341–63. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  31. Moretti, Franco. (2000). ‘Conjectures on World Literature’. New Left Review 1, Jan/Feb 54–68.Google Scholar
  32. Murray, Susan. (2008). ‘Digital Images, Photo-Sharing, and Our Shifting Notions of Everyday Aesthetics’. Journal of Visual Culture 7, no. 2: 147–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ok, HyeRoung. (2012). ‘Cinema in Your Hand, Cinema on the Street: The Aesthetics of Korean Cinema’. Public, no. 40: 109–17.Google Scholar
  34. Poremba, Cindy. (2007). ‘Point and Shoot: Remediating Photography in Gamespace’. Games and Culture 2, no. 1: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Raessens, Joost. (2005). ‘Computer Games as Participatory Media Culture’. In Handbook of Computer Games Studies, ed. J. Raessens and J. Goldstein, 373–88. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  36. Reiger, Oya. Y. (2010). ‘Framing Digital Humanities: The Role of New Media in Humanities Scholarship’. First Monday 15, no. 10, 4 October. Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3198/2628 >.
  37. Rentfrow, Daphnée. (2008). ‘S(t)imulating War: From Early Films to Military Games’. In Computer Games as a Sociocultural Phenomenon: Games Without Frontiers, War Without Tears, ed. Andreas Jahn-Sudmann and Ralf Stockmann, 87–98. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rieder, Bernhard, and Thoe Röhle. (2012). ‘Digital Methods: Five Challenges’. In Understanding Digital Humanities, ed. David M. Berry, 67–84. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Serres, Michel. (1982). The Parasite. Trans. L. Schehr. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, Marc. A. (2012). ‘Charting Collections of Connections with Maps and Measures’. Media X Stanford. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwVvQhhLUqc.
  41. Sobchack, Vivian. (1999). ‘Nostalgia for a Digital Object: Regrets on the Quickening of QuickTime’. Millennium Film Journal 34. Available at: http://www.mfj-online.org/journalPages/MFJ34/VivianSobchack.html.
  42. Sontag, Susan. (1977). On Photography. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  43. Svensson, Patrick. (2009). ‘Humanities Computing as Digital Humanities’. Digital Humanities Quarterly 3, no. 3. Available at: http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/3/000065/000065.html.
  44. Tomkins, Silvan. (1962). Affect Imagery Consciousness. Volume 1. The Positive Affects. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, Ross. (2007). Subjective Universality in Kant’s Aesthetics. Berne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Christopher Moore 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Moore

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations