Looking and Seeing: Section Seven: Assignment: Dot in Space

Dot in space ... “is the key to the visual as the visual.”  The authors assert it encapsulates the experience of seeing:  to see a figure on a ground.  (As I’ve been arguing all along), seeing is possible because of contrast, because one thing is different from another thing. Perception, the authors argue, is an expression of a foreground figure on a background, or dot-in-space.  In fact, “all the photographs we have taken so far are dot in space.”

They then use a common optical illusion, which can be seen in one of two ways, to demonstrate how the perceiver creates perception.  They do this to make the point that perception and perceiver cannot be separated.  There is, in other words, no objective visual reality.

The assignment is to go out and shoot some dots-in-space. The chapter then proceeds to a discussion of Dot-in-Space as a Level Two practice, which the authors describe as “the world of sense and sensibility, the world of ordinary magic and everyday beauty.”

The biggest difference from Level 1 is a refinement of vision, a pulling back in which the abstract becomes concrete. (This appears to be contrary to conventional photographic practice, which begins with shooting things before learning to see them as symbols.)  There is direct engagement with things, rather than “a distanced documentation and representation.”  In Level 2, “the dot is no longer a formal perceptual value.”

The assignment is extended to work at Level 2 and seeing things as manifesting things. Unfortunately, it is not suggested how one might engage this kind of vision, but the authors claim that in reviewing photographs one should be able to distinguish between L1 and L2 images.  I’d like to see some side-by-side comparisons.

I will be shooting Dot in Space starting this weekend, but until then I have posted some recent images that seem to fit the bill.

#