Shaping Images: Scholarly Perspectives on Image Manipulation 9783110477092, 9783110474978

Citation preview

Thorsten Stephan Beck Shaping Images

Thorsten Stephan Beck

Shaping Images

Scholarly Perspectives on Image Manipulation

SAUR

Die vorliegende Arbeit wurde an der Philosophischen Fakultät I der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin im Jahr 2016 als Dissertation unter dem Titel SHAPING IMAGES. Scholarly Perspectives on Image Manipulation. A Case Study: The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) angenommen. Die Publikation wird ermöglicht durch den Exzellenzcluster Bild Wissen Gestaltung. Ein Interdisziplinäres Labor der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin und die finanzielle Unterstützung durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft im Rahmen der Exzellenzinitiative. This publication was made possible by the Image Knowledge Gestaltung. An Interdisciplinary Laboratory Cluster of Excellence at the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin with financial support from the German Research Foundation as a part of the Excellence Initiative.

ISBN 978-3-11-047497-8 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-047709-2 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-047509-8 Set-ISBN 978-3-11-047710-8 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. © 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Umschlagabbildung: “Experimental Zone” at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Photograph Fabian Scholz, 2015 Satz: Konvertus B.V., Haarlem Druck und Bindung: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Acknowledgements This intellectual voyage into the world of scholarly thinking and performing at times felt like an exploratory expedition into some unknown territory. During my encounters with scholars from various disciplines I was often challenged with ideas, habitudes and rituals that were completely new to me. This might be one of the reasons I sometimes view this text as some kind of travelogue. Needless to say, travelers are more often than not in need of assistance en route. I owe special thanks to a lot of people who helped me on my way: thank you all for your contributions, your kindness, your help and your attention. First and foremost I like to express my very great appreciation and gratitude to Prof. Michael Seadle who accompanied me from the very beginning to the very end of this trip. His valuable advice, profound experience, constant supervision and immense encouragement helped me during the research and writing of this thesis. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my Ph.D. study. He provided me with the essential instruments that enabled me to navigate unfamiliar seas without losing my sense of direction. Thank you, Michael, you were and remain my best role model for a scholar. Moreover, I am particular grateful to the second reader of my thesis, Prof. Jörg Niewöhner, for his invaluable and eye-opening comments and for teaching me so many new ways of perceiving and interpreting things. Through you I became familiar with the concept of ideas that are “good to think with” and many of your ideas deeply influenced my work and my way of pursuing my research. I will forever be thankful to all those fellow researchers for the stimulating discussions, the encouragement, the support and the willingness to answer countless questions about image manipulation and its implications. I would like to express my most heartfelt thanks to: Bodo Baumunk, Dr. Carola Becker, Angela Boesl, Prof. Horst Bredekamp, Dr. Jürgen Feige, Dr. Gregor Hagedorn, Prof. Regine Hengge, Prof. Hannelore Hoch, Anouk Aimee Hoffmeister, Andreas Lange, Andreas Pinkow, Dr. Friederike Saxe, Dr. Christian Stein, Alexander Struck, Marc Tamschick, Theresia Ziehe, and Prof. Carola Zwick. Without your precious support, your passionate commitment, and your ­never-ending frankness it would not have been possible to conduct this research. I would also like to extend my special thanks to the speakers of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung, Professor Horst Bredekamp and Professor Wolfgang Schäffner. They not only volunteered as informants in my interview projects, but also intellectually inspired me and practically supported my work in any conceivable way.

VI 

 Acknowledgements

Thanks also go out to Deborah Zehnder, coordinator of the Cluster of Excellence, for providing this project with all the necessary resources. Your ­encouragement, dedication and support have been very much appreciated. My grateful thanks also go out to Kathrin Bauer, head of the administrative and financial management department at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. She is my role model with respect to patience, accuracy, endless kindness and devotion. Heartfelt thanks go to the editor and proofreader of this work, Angelika Niemeyer, for her intellectual support in the writing phase of this thesis and for the countless invaluable suggestions, comments, and corrections that helped to finish this manuscript! Dear An, you made this a very pleasant journey! Thank you for supporting me with all your skill, your patience and cheerful determination. I like to express my gratitude to Claudia Heyer and Monika Pfleghar at De Gruyter’s who helped me to prepare this manuscript for publication. I would like to thank Nick Butterfield at Herman Miller, Prof. Dorothee Haffner (HTW Berlin), Dr. Jennifer L. Peters and Dr. Michael R. Taylor at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Tennessee, and Christoph Wingender (Deutsches Hygienemuseum Dresden) for granting copyrights and thus helping me with this project. More thanks go out to all those who supported the exhibition “Speaking Images – Speaking of Images”, especially Melanie Rügenhagen, Frauke Stuhl, Claudia Lamas Cornejo, Julia Blumenthal and Kerstin Kühl. Thank you all for your contributions, your kindness, your help and your commitment. Special thanks should be given to Focko Niemeyer, who in all those months was much more than a one-of-a-kind friend and a talented squash player. He more than once helped me to stay focused and on track. Thank you Focko – without your sense of humor, your encouragement and your friendship this journey would have been different, certainly harder – even virtually impossible. Thanks to all of you. You carried me forward even on my toughest days. Finally I would like to dedicate this book to my wife Berit, who always believed in me and to the most spectacular children in the world, Eli, Frieda, and Hugo. None of this makes sense without you!

Contents Acknowledgements 

 V

Abstract / Zusammenfassung 

 XIII

 1 1 Introduction  1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter   2 1.2 Problem Definition   10 1.3 Research Background   13 1.4 Research Questions   15 2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2

 19 Theoretical Framework  Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis   19 Pilot Phase: Participant Observation & Ethnographic Exhibition  Scholarly Perspectives on Image Manipulation   26 Asking the Editors   29 Role of the Ethnographer   29 Data Analysis and Interpretation   31 Qualitative Content Analysis   32 Methodological Framework – An Information Ecology   33

 37 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works  3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud   37 3.1.1 The Hwang Case   38 3.1.2 The Obokata/Sasai Case   41 3.1.3 The Mitalipov Case   43 3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines   46 3.2.1 Editorial Statements in the Aftermath of the Scandals   46 3.2.2 The Establishment of Guidelines and Recommended Measures  3.2.3 Limits of Control: The Side Effects of Guidelines   51 3.2.4 Conclusions   53 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project  4.1 Introducing the Informants  55 4.1.1 Design  56 4.1.2 Biology  69

55

 20

 49

VIII 

 Contents

4.1.3 Art History  81 4.1.4 Computer Sciences   90 4.1.5 Conclusions   99 4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image  100 101 4.2.1 Image as Open or Generic Term  4.2.2 “Shape-related Interventions in Natural Structures”  104 4.2.3 Image as Visual Stimuli  107 4.2.4 Tool – Agency – Representation  110  113 4.2.5 Conclusions  4.3 Approaching the Invisible  115 4.3.1 In Search of Clarity – Strategies of Visualization in Biology  116 4.3.2 Activation Potential and Areas of Meaning: Design Perspectives  119 4.3.3 “Intertwined Poles” – Curatorial and Art Historical Perspectives  123  126 4.3.4 Data, Gaming and Cropped Images in Computer Science  4.3.5 Conclusions  129 4.4 Purposes and Practices  130  131 4.4.1 “Thinking with the Hands”  4.4.2 Documentation and Representation  140 4.4.3 Comparison and Analysis  144 4.4.4 Communication Aids  149 4.4.5 Conclusions  152 4.5 Image Manipulation: Standpoints & Discussion  152 4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics  157 4.6.1 Rules that matter!  158 4.6.2 Individual Responsibility  160 4.6.3 Unwritten Rules: Conventions, Community Standards and Self Made Rules  164 4.6.4 The Limits of Rules  167 4.6.5 Conclusions  174  176 Analysis Part II: Asking the Editors  Contacting the Editors  176 The Editor’s Role in the Ecology  177 Editors Reaction and Statements: Trust, Responsibility and the Limits of Guidelines  178 5.4 Summary  181

5 5.1 5.2 5.3

6

Final Remarks: Shaping Images 

183

Contents 

7 References  187 7.1 Monographs and Articles  187 7.2 Journal Articles and Online Resources  197 8 Appendixes  8.1 Table of Figures  197 8.2 Interview Questionnaires  200 8.3 List of Abbreviations  203 8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes  203

190

 IX

The crow wish’d every thing was black,  the owl that every thing was white. William Blake 

Abstract Today scientific results are mostly published online and the dissemination of powerful software has facilitated image manipulation. Due to such developments, policies and procedures for the production and publication of images have profoundly changed. Numerous fraud scandals have shaken the scientific community and a “crisis of trust” was claimed. Consequently, guidelines for image manipulation were discussed and implemented by a number of scholarly journals. Since such guidelines cannot cover all aspects of image production and processing in all the fields, there is still a large amount of uncertainty as to what manipulations should be considered appropriate. This study examines the guidelines and practical logics scholars apply in their work with images from a Library and Information Science perspective. It analyzes manipulations that scholars consider appropriate or inappropriate and discusses those dimensions of image production that cannot easily be controlled by means of guidelines. It raises the question whether guidelines are an appropriate means for facing and solving the alleged crisis of trust with regard to images.

Zusammenfassung Wissenschaftliche Resultate werden heute vielfach elektronisch publiziert und die Verbreitung bildverarbeitender Programme hat die Bearbeitung von Bildern deutlich vereinfacht. In der Folge haben sich auch die Anforderungen an die Produktion und Publikation von Bildern verändert. Zahlreiche Skandale, bei denen Bilder manipuliert wurden, haben zudem Verunsicherung ausgelöst und es wurde die Frage aufgeworfen, ob den Informationen in Bildern überhaupt noch vertraut werden kann. Verbindliche Regeln der Bildbearbeitung wurden gefordert und manche wissenschaftliche Journale haben diese auch eingeführt. Da Richtlinien aber kaum alle Praktiken der Bildproduktion in den verschiedenen wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen und Subdisziplinen berücksichtigen können, besteht weiter Unsicherheit darüber welche Form von Manipulationen als angemessen zu betrachten sind. Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht aus informationswissenschaftlicher Sicht die Richtlinien oder praktischen Ansätze, die Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler unterschiedlicher disziplinärer Herkunft bei der Bearbeitung von Bildern einsetzen, welche Formen der Manipulation sie für angemessen halten und welche Dimensionen der Bildbearbeitung sich nicht durch Richtlinien steuern lassen. Es wird untersucht, ob Richtlinien ein probates Mittel sind, um die Vertrauenskrise im Umgang mit Bildern zu überwinden.

1 Introduction Scholarly images should have a number of features: they should be intelligible and present information; have a sensory value that attracts attention and have a certain power of persuasion. Images can represent data or help to accumulate and interpret results, they serve both as tools and means of communication – and very often they are objects of scholarly analysis. Scholars are the producers and primary consumers of such images – they learn to create images according to defined rules and to communicate them effectively to any given audience. When doing so they apply ethical guidelines derived from their respective disciplinary fields. Having control over what is thought to be one of the most powerful means of knowledge production is an appealing notion, but do these assertions indeed reflect scholarly reality – or do they draw an overly idealistic picture? Having an immediate impact makes images special. They deliver information faster than texts – which needs to be deciphered word-by-word and phrase-by-phrase. Perceiving a picture does not necessarily require theoretical concepts or special skills. For anyone with adequate eyesight, it just takes a moment and a glimpse to grasp what is presented. For a scholarly audience – or even more for an audience from outside the academic sphere – the question arises whether seeing is really equivalent to understanding and whether the information in images can be controlled? Controlling the information in images is first of all (among other factors) closely connected to the process of image production. There is a thin line between legitimate image editing and illegitimate image manipulation. Nowadays, powerful software tools are widespread and facilitate the production and alteration of images. Such technological innovations profoundly changed how images are perceived today. Researchers all over the world are aware of prominent cases in which images were inappropriately manipulated or fabricated and numerous attempts have been made in order to establish understandable and transparent guidelines for the editing of images. But what does manipulation mean and how is it understood in the context of the production of images? What kinds of manipulation do scholars generally consider appropriate or inappropriate? Which guidelines have been established to preserve image integrity and who applies them? How can the tension between what is possible and what is acceptable be resolved best? Such notions formed the starting point for an ethnographic observation at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung at Humboldt University Berlin. The questions that played a role were first of all: do scholars actually pay attention to how images are edited? Do they critically question images in academic presentations? What aims and purposes are at the heart of scholarly work with images or how can misunderstandings be avoided when using images as a means

2 

 1 Introduction

of communication? The research aimed at understanding whether scholars edited images in order to make them clearer, brighter or more appealing and how much theoretical knowledge they considered necessary in their professional work. This initiated an ethnographic observation that looked more closely at the practices scholars applied and the factors that shaped their work with regard to images.

1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter When first visiting the website of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory I was impressed by an image I found there. This photograph showed objects resembling shiny red hair rollers, which later turned out to be models of glass sponges (cf. Fig. 1). These models were skillfully photographed: overall the objects were pin sharp, but in the foreground and the background they were blurred so that the attention automatically was drawn to the center of the image. The beauty of these structures was stunning – but at the same time the photograph appeared rather artificial and staged. A bluish light emanated from the background and was smoothly reflected by the polished surfaces of the vertical, geometrical bodies. In the course of this observation a spokesperson of the laboratory explained that the glass sponges were an “extremely important advertising motif” in the “initial phase” of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. She further elaborated that without knowing the context the image was only irritating. But it was exactly this irritation that aimed at expressing how knowledge could be communicated through models.1 Confusion was used as an instrument to arouse curiosity and to attract attention and consequently the caption of the photo only provided the name of the photographer and the location of where the picture was taken. No more information was added as to what these structures actually showed. But there was still another dimension in which the photo transferred information. In my eyes, this picture expressed the self-image of a young and innovative institution that intended to walk new paths and pose new and unprecedented questions.

A Nation in the Making In the early stages of my research at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory I experienced a young organization still in the making. While observing the interactions

1 Interview on June 13, 2013.

1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter 

 3

and dynamics inside the project I soon found myself comparing it to an ecosystem. It seemed as if a small island was created amid an ocean and as if evolution was running on a fast track. The breathtaking activity of colonization then unfolded its dazzling energies. Everywhere there were enthusiasm, activity and optimism to be found. Life in the laboratory seemed to resemble life in a beehive. These early impressions later triggered my decision to take the ecology metaphor seriously in the context of this work. Thinking of the laboratory as Information Ecology (see section 2.2.2) elucidated the fact that information does not exist in an atomistic and abstract state, but must be seen in relation to a social context in which it gains meaning and significance. People produce images to address other people and to achieve certain effects. Image work thus also has a second layer and serves as a form of adhesive agent for the institution. It connects people, produces a group identity and provides a common ground for the entire community.

Fig. 1: Glass Sponges. Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, Golm. Photograph Kerstin Kühl, 2012.

Researchers who joined the project were expected to engage actively in the process of nation building. But how can the term “nation” be applied when looking at

4 

 1 Introduction

a research institution? This term is also used here in a metaphorical sense to describe an artificially setup community that shares a territory and has a sense of group solidarity – a location where social relations among its members play a core role. First this nation appeared more like a scattered group that only came together for occasionally arranged appointments and only for well-defined purposes. But soon institutionalized meetings were established which gave structure to the project. Once a week a “Lunch Talk” (Orig. Engl., cf. Fig. 2; Figs. 6 & 7) was organized in which research fellows, principal investigators, associated members and students met and listened to presentations discussing relevant aspects: Power Point lectures, pizza and coffee, followed by gathering in groups and informal chats. Different food offers were made (cf. Fig. 3) but the ritual basically stayed the same. Furthermore more definite event formats were established, for example the “Interdisciplinary Controversy” in which terminology was discussed in evening sessions (e.g. “Code” on December 12, 2013; “What is Image?” on January 16, 2014 or “Space” on February 27, 2014); the “Learning with…” workshop in which members of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory taught a certain subject, tool or practice.

Fig. 2: A “Lunch Talk” at the central laboratory. Photograph Thorsten Beck (TB), 2013.

1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter 

 5

Fig. 3: Offering food at “Lunch Talk”. Photograph TB, 2013.

Workshops were set up to learn how to use a 3D-printer, how to work with a laser cutter or how to apply the reference management tool Zotero. Moreover in the initial phase the research fellows organized a number of all-day collaborative workshops. Topics like “Interdisciplinarity” or “Gameplay” were discussed in these groups. The “base projects” started to define their research aims and focused on organizing work. Once a year a closed conference – the so-called “Retreat” (Orig. Engl.) – was held in order to monitor progress and to gather researchers of different groups and disciplines around one table. All these events and aspects defined a community infrastructure that supported individual and disciplinary exchanges, intellectual engagement and confrontation – as one of the officials of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory once put it – meaning to “let the disciplines run towards each other.” The building of a nation also took place on the corporate design level, which included the design of spaces, work equipment as well as all kinds of activities concerning public relations (cf. Fig. 4). Upon joining the laboratory scholars were equipped with portable computers, rolling file cabinets (the “Bite”, see Fig. 5), business cards, an electronic signature for the mailing program, the corporate-identity slide master for Keynote presentations and many more serviceable devices and tools. On certain special occasions like on New Year’s Day the

6 

 1 Introduction

fellows received little presents, for example a laser pointer or a personalized USB stick with the logo of the laboratory and the name of the member. Another identity-shaping aspect sure is the fact that the laboratory was funded as part of the “Excellence Initiative” and maybe it is not too far-fetched to assume that the term “excellence” automatically evokes a feeling of identity and gives the members of a group the feeling of being on a mission. Every week the members of the laboratory received a digital version of the weekly “Cluster Journal” (Orig. “Clusterzeitung”) and a newsletter with upcoming appointments and events to keep everybody informed about plans and progress. All these aspects and measures (this is only a random choice which could easily be expanded) constitute a gentle and quiet way of deepening identification with the project, of initiating collaboration among researchers and of establishing a coherent and powerful group. This institution – or let me again call it an “island” – was not a terra incognita, not a desolate world, but a place developed by a group of settlers (pathfinders that built up the work space and set up an administration) – so that all new arrivals found a well established and comfortable infrastructure.

Fig. 4: Image flyer produced for base project “Shaping Knowledge”. Photograph Alexander Struck & TB, 2013. In the early stages of work members of the laboratory were invited to visualize their projects’ agenda. This image shows a network graph covered by a layer of transparent paper showing handwritten notes – depicting entities and agents and their relations within an imaginary system. The photograph was taken with a Panasonic DMC-FS16 camera in front of a lamp in order to make the background appear shiny and to enhance the spatial dimension. I later increased brightness and contrast with Photoshop.

1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter 

 7

Fig. 5: Researcher Michael Dürfeld in front of a series of roll containers (the “Bite”) at the central laboratory. Photograph TB, 2013.

These newcomers (me included) were in many ways a socially homogeneous crowd. Most of them were academically trained or still enrolled in some form of academic education. From the way they behaved, their way of speaking and attire I got the impression that most of them came from a more well off background. This common background caused a special atmosphere in which many things seemed to be natural beyond any need for additional mediation and negotiation. An unspoken agreement seemed to exist within this group – a certain form of consent – or how else can it be explained that discussions about values, or about role behavior and hierarchy were rarely on the agenda. Instead it seemed as if new members quickly adapted the values of the group. Given the well-prepared work situation this level of acceptance might not be too surprising. Researchers were provided with all necessary tools for their work; they were free to travel, they received all kinds of work materials or services in order to contribute to the aims of the project, or – metaphorically speaking – in order to contribute to the prosperity of the island. Nevertheless the Interdisciplinary

8 

 1 Introduction

Laboratory remained an artificial construction as it was only funded for a certain time span and would consequently vanish at some point in the future. Thus artificiality is one of the defining aspects for understanding this ecosystem, for understanding its inhabitants and their behavior. As everybody`s stay was limited, it became evident that each individual constantly had to make self-interests compatible with the prosperity of the community.

Core Values and Self Image This brief description should suffice to give a first notion of the dynamics that accompanied the establishment of this island and the making of this nation. Nation-building activities had to be differentiated to meet the ambitious aims of the laboratory – to understand and explain interdisciplinarity and to develop a multidisciplinary scholarly approach with a strong focus on the aspect of design. Not surprisingly networking activities in consequence were considered a core value in this setting and each researcher was expected to actively take part in this process (“This is the kind of open-mindedness that you would have to bring with you.”2). It was part of an unwritten agenda (most expectations were not provided in writing) addressed to the group of research fellows. This agenda intended to initiate intellectual exchange among scholars from different disciplines without giving up or weakening disciplinary standpoints. Researchers were invited to deliberately choose their own set of interdisciplinary working methods and to establish effective pathways to cooperation. In the first few weeks it was regularly pointed out how the mere existence of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory represented a value in itself almost comparable to a sports qualification. It was stated that everybody who joined the enterprise had to be aware of how special it was because in this environment extraordinary developments were expected to take place. Each researcher was invited to develop individual activities and to contribute his or her ideas, to assume his or her special role in the design of the system and to find a physical workplace in the co-working space of the laboratory. In these early days the Interdisciplinary Laboratory was frequently compared to historical research facilities like the Hochschule für Kommunikation und Gestaltung in Ulm3 or to the Blackmountain College4 in North

2 Field notes on January 15, 2013. 3 http://www.hfk-bw.de 4 For further information see: http://www.blackmountaincollege.org; http://black-mountainresearch.com; Accessed: February 3, 2016.

1.1 The Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung. A Visual Encounter 

 9

Carolina, to stress the direction this project was heading. But historical implications were not at the center of the agenda. It was the present – and above all the future – that was the focal point. In the future “Gestaltung” was expected to unfold its utopian and visionary energies and now, in the present, the research project anticipated such future realities. It was part of the strategic concept that this group was shaped very carefully – in the sense that its members developed particular relations and that from the building of a nation something new was supposed to emerge, some added value created. It promised a form of higher intelligence that was supposed to achieve more than what each individual would have been able to achieve on her/his own. The idea of an interconnected institution and of collective intelligence was repeated like a mantra in the early phase of the collaboration. Such anthropological premises constituted the work ethics of the project and were not discussed controversially, but prevailed without opposition. The assumption “the group is smarter than the sum of its parts” was widely accepted and it seemed as if each individual was ready to identify with this concept and to go with the flow. Using the main metaphor once more: the islanders developed a sense that it was easier to face the powers of the tides as a group because when push came to shove the isolated individual would have less chance to survive. The title of the research project “Image Knowledge Gestaltung” itself may require few explanations. It strikes the eye that the term “Gestaltung” – unlike “Image” and “Knowledge” – is not translated into English. I learned from informants that in the early phase of the project the term became subject to profound discussions. Back then there were those voices who demanded to better replace “Gestaltung” with the English term “design” to assure a better understanding in an international context, but others were of the opinion that this would only over-simplify the layers of meaning of the word gestalt. The understanding of the term goes back to German Gestalt psychologists in the early twentieth century, when “thinkers like Wertheimer, Köhler or Koffka” emphasized “the inherent and the innate over learned experience” and (…) studied how spontaneous forces combined and separated elements to form different entities and how wholes were created out of perceptual parts. Although the concept of the ‘gestalt’ is often described as the whole being different from (or, even more ambiguously, as ‘more than’) the sum of its parts, it may be more accurate to say that a gestalt implies a configuration that is so inherently unified that its properties cannot be derived from the individual properties of its parts. (Barry 1997, 42)

The fact that the German term was finally chosen underlines how the participants of this project saw their mission: the research approach of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory was meant to incorporate the “gestalt idea” in a way so that

10 

 1 Introduction

the configuration of associated scholars and their interactions would open up new perspectives and allow to formulate a new cultural theory of the image as an epistemic object.

1.2 Problem Definition Trying to explain how scholars’ deal with the information in images is not trivial at all and the question arises where such an approach could eventually begin. There are several options: should it start with the term image and its manifold meanings, with the viewer and her/his perspective or with the producer with her distinct aims? But how can an analysis begin without the complication of a multitude of inherent dimensions? If the understanding of images is so complicated that a single discipline cannot fully explain how it works, how is it feasible that scholars are able to make use of images without misunderstandings? Scholars who deal with images have to cope with countless variables and many unknowns. In contrast to texts images present their content not in a sequential order but in a single instant: Bilder entfalten folglich ihre epistemologische Funktion so, dass das, was immer sie auszudrücken oder zu symbolisieren suchen, sie im Modus eines Zeigens und Sichzeigens zu erkennen geben. (Mersch 2005, 325)

Moreover, images manifest themselves in various forms: drawings and graphic reproductions, paintings which are considered images as well as all sorts of photographic techniques, renderings, optical illusions, moving images, stage designs, interfaces, 3D-animations, media facades or even mental images, depending on how widely the term is defined. Due to their respective fields of interests, different disciplines (resp. scholars) have developed different terminologies for how they understand images. Some analyze images from the perspective of the viewer (Barry 1997; Morus 2006), some define image as a “sign” (Kerner & Duroy 1988) or as epistemic objects (Daston & Galison 2007), and others interpret images as “agents” or “actors.”5 In a publication from information science the following can be found: Indeed, the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) definition of ‘image’ includes light as a particular source of images: an image can be: ‘An optical appearance or counterpart of an object,

5 Images are attributed a distinct power to both, “generate and control” what they visually express. For example: https://www.interdisciplinary-laboratory.hu-berlin.de/de/schluesselthemen/ bildagenten. Accessed: February 2, 2016.



1.2 Problem Definition 

 11

such as is produced by rays of light either reflected as from a mirror, refracted as through a lens, or falling on a surface after passing through a small aperture (…) (Terras 2008, 1)

Without doubt images have to be analyzed with regard to particular contexts, they have to be carefully described and interpreted, but some aspects are always likely to escape attention – no matter whether they are theoretical assumptions or philosophical implications, technical issues or aspects of perception. The image of a tree in the middle of a landscape for example could certainly be used to illustrate ecological environmental problems; it could symbolize resilience or solitude or could be used as a metaphor for the tree of knowledge – foremost depending on the context in which it is used. It could be a photograph (digital or analog); it could be a drawing, an artifact or screenshot. It requires no further explanation because whoever looks at it will see different things according to individual viewing habits, expectations and experiences.

Fig. 6: Lecture held at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on September 3, 2013. Photograph TB.

But understanding how scholars use images requires more than only an awareness of contexts, perspectives or material aspects. Scholars have published

12 

 1 Introduction

extensively as to the complexity of images and new forms of visual literacy have been demanded (Maar et al., 2000; Barry 1997). It has been pointed out that the way images are used is dependent on who we are and how we think (Daston & Galison 2007). While publications from the field of Science and Technology Studies compared and discussed the use of images in various ­scientific contexts (Coopmans, Vertesi, Lynch & Woolgar, 2014), an interdisciplinary science of images has frequently been demanded (Burda & Maar 2004; Sachs-Hombach 2005). From how the topic is discussed in the literature it can be learned that there are many factors that play a role for the production of knowledge with images. Though all of these aspects are relevant, the main focus of this study is on what constitutes appropriate or inappropriate image manipulations and the question is raised how scholars from different fields conceive such distinctions. Clearly, images play a key role in scholarly knowledge production, but is has been said that “knowing” requires the ability to “identify, describe, and explain.” (cf. Dwyer & Buckle 2009, 59) Therefore, images in this study are put into a black box while the main focus is on scholarly aims and purposes and on the skills, tools and methods involved – with a strong emphasis on the ecology in which they are embedded. The overall aim is to get a better understanding of the rationality of scholarly actions and their underlying motivations. Simultaneously the ambiguity and potential disinformation that images can carry are discussed and the question how scholars cope with the limits of their expertise is dealt with. In his book Seeing Dark Things Roy Sorensen showed how looking at the obscured side of things can be equally productive and rewarding when trying to understand phenomena – compared to looking at their illuminated side: Negative facts are repugnant to human philosophers. People have a strong intuition that reality is fundamentally positive. But from a logical point of view, negative facts provide a more powerful reductive base than do positive facts. (Sorensen 2008, 227)

The aim of this is not a philosophical treaty but rather the result of an ethnographic field study that pays close attention to what scholars not only think and express but also to what they fail to surmise and disclose in their practical work with images. Image manipulation plays a core role in almost all academic fields, but as long as it is not fully clear what constitutes appropriate manipulations and what makes manipulations inappropriate a chance remains that the information in images may be inadequately distorted. However, following the logic of Sorensen, the assumption is that something might be learned from what is disguised and concealed or deliberately left out when it comes to how scholars portray the principles that guide them in their work with images.



1.3 Research Background 

 13

1.3 Research Background In Library and Information Science images play a key role in multiple ways. Processes of information visualization, of information retrieval and networks of knowledge are all linked to visual aspects. This discipline addresses topics like the improvement of search queries in image-controlled systems, it deals with automated pattern recognition, with the further development of the semantic web6, with ontology development for image indexing or human-computer-interactions – to only name a few. By integrating visual or even tactile experiences to information systems it is assumed to come across the “Problem der Abstraktheit digitaler Informationen” (Hobohm 2011). But even when it comes to interactions in social networks or isolated visualization techniques (e.g. for 3D-visualizations, see Brockelmann & Wolf 2013) – the need for visual research has evolved ever since the advent of the Internet. Despite these trends, dealing with images on a theoretical level does not seem to be a core concern for the discipline. Nevertheless, the importance of images as carriers of information is constantly discussed and widely accepted. In an introduction to the cataloguing of Information resources for example, image databases (with regard to the broader issue of information retrieval) are referred to in detail (Lauber-Reymann 2010). Other studies discuss the “often overlooked requirement of attractiveness (or ‘aesthetics’) in visualization” (Vande Moere & Purchase 2015, 356) and recommend the implementation of fundamental design principles in the process of information visualization. Moreover, Skeels et al (2010) have suggested that a certain level of uncertainty has to be critically regarded whenever information is visualized. In addition – this is where this work sets in – reflecting the aspects of image usage can be of much benefit to the field of Library and Information Science. In the face of a growing density of information, images gain a significance and quality of their own. It is assumed that visual information is comprehended and digested more quickly (Cukier 2010) than its non-visual counterpart and this is why it becomes more and more important to understand how this information is produced, manipulated or understood. Manipulation is – especially from a scholarly point of view – an ambiguous term, because in a literal sense it reflects both legitimate image editing and fraudulent behavior. The Merriam-Webster online encyclopaedia7 defines the transitive verb “to manipulate” as follows:

6 For example the title of the Potsdam I-Science-Day 2011 was “Digitale Gesellschaft: vom Web 2.0 zum semantischen und visuellen Web 3.0.” 7 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/manipulate. Accessed: January 15, 2016.

14 

 1 Introduction

1) to treat or operate with or as if with the hands or by mechanical means especially in a skillful manner 2) a) to manage or utilize skillfully b) to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one’s own advantage 3) to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one’s purpose Discussing and understanding this ambiguity is at the heart of this research. Thus, in this context publications will be relevant that deal with the more theoretical side of manipulation as well as those that focus on the establishment of guidelines and aspects of image integrity from a more practice-oriented perspective (cf. section 3.2). Furthermore, this work will include selected scientific editorials that reflect how journal editors reacted to cases of image manipulation in the field of biology and how editors discussed the need for guidelines. Institutions like the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) or the Council of Science Editors (CSE) issued comprehensive publications in which they summarized and communicated guidelines to the scholarly community.8 Another aspect worth mentioning: image use in ethnography attracts a lot of attention from a theoretical perspective, which the numerous works that contribute to the field of Visual Anthropology prove. (Banks & Ruby 2012; Grimshaw 2005; Ingold 2011; Pink 2013) Ethnographic writers have been dealing with visual aspects for a long time. Morphy and Banks claim: Visual understanding, what we see and how we interpret it, is an important part of the way we exist as humans in the world and the ultimate justification for the discipline of visual anthropology must lie in this direction: it is the study of the properties of visual systems; of how things are seen and how what is seen is understood. (Banks & Morphy 1997, 21)

Margarete Mead’s 1975 essay on the meaning of visual instruments (like photography or videotaping) for anthropological fieldwork clearly shows how far the debate dates back. However, photography and even movies were certainly used for ethnographic purposes long before M. Mead: just think of Robert Flaherty’s legendary silent movie Nanook of the North (1922) in which he documented and dramatized the life of an Inuit and captured his adventures for a worldwide audience. Though the value of filming for ethnographic purposes has long been debated (Keifenheim 2003), documentary films have been popular among

8 The Council of Science Editors published a “White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications” in 2012.



1.4 Research Questions 

 15

ethnographers until today, but many more visual media were used over the years in order to support the process of observation. Photographs are maybe considered the most popular form of expressions, but drawings as well are widely used and sometimes even regarded as an alternative form of seeing (Taussig 2011) or “as an inscriptive practice in its own right” (Ingold 2011, 2). Such aspects were of major interest to me when I was writing this work, because I asked myself more than once how images could help to reflect my ethnographic observations and consequently I produced a number of images and included them in this work in order to visually support my ethnographic descriptions. Approaches that highlight visual practices in science by referring to interdisciplinary aspects (Heumann & Hüntelmann 2013; Coopmans, Vertesi, Lynch & Woolgar 2014) will help to discuss and interpret some of the observations and outcomes. For example Burri & Dumit have pointed out the need for in-depth case studies. They have come to the conclusion, “It is important to understand who knows what, who is allowed to know, and who can actually say what he or she knows.” (Burri & Dumit 2007, 302) Moreover, Frankel & de Pace have shown in their study on Visual Strategies (2012) how a design perspective can enable scholars to critically evaluate imaging practices in order to use images more effectively, while Elkins (2008) criticized Frankel for overemphasizing the role of aesthetics for scientific knowledge production in her works. Despite such criticism, the design perspective will play a key role in this study in many respects and raising general questions regarding the practices of image editing is in the nature of this subject.

1.4 Research Questions Nowadays scholars are generally aware that working with images takes professional skills, skills for producing, editing and handling of images (Terras 2008). This not only requires a critical stance towards the perception of images but also an ability to critically analyze the information contained in them. Furthermore proficiency in the use of digital tools – or at least a basic understanding of how images are fabricated and processed is necessary. Adjustments including cropping, changing of brightness, color and contrast, or even recomposing – have become easily accessible know-how even without spending long hours in a darkroom. In a scholarly context like in any other field, images can attract a lot of attention and for many scholars the cleaning-up and alteration of images are a firm part of their daily routine: Pretty images are highly valued in scientific work; for example, having one’s image published as the cover artwork for a high-profile scientific journal is a coveted honour. (Frow 2012, 375)

16 

 1 Introduction

At the same time, image manipulation in its various forms has been common practice for ages and thus has had a long history (Deussen 2007; Raddatz 2009). The history of photography for example documents many cases of image manipulation9 – let it be for political, entertainment or advertising purposes (Hütter et al. 2000) and this might be a reason that the United States National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) “drafted a statement of principle specific to digital images as early as 1990” (Cromey 2010, 641). But despite such efforts image manipulation has remained a constant concern and even today attracts a lot of attention not only in press photography, but also in the academic field and way beyond it. In the 2015 World Press Photo (WPP) award competition for example about 20 percent of the images submitted were disqualified because of inappropriate manipulations (Smyth 2015). In a very similar way the academic world was shaken by scandals that involved image manipulation in recent years (cf. chapter 3). Partly as a consequence of these scandals and partly because of the technological innovations that fundamentally changed the process of publication a number of scholarly initiatives (cf. section 3.2.2) started to define standards in order to preserve best scientific practice and due diligence when dealing with images. Inroads were made in the field of biology, but soon fundamental questions arose: obviously it was not an insignificant task to develop uniform and binding standards that covered all relevant aspects of image production. This partly resulted from the very nature of imaging techniques in certain fields like for example in astronomy: many image-based insights can only be achieved through the means of massive manipulations (Frow 2012; Adelmann et al. 2009) – which cannot per se be addressed as illegitimate or deceptive without affecting the capacities of images as epistemic objects. Although there is a widespread consensus that the fraudulent use of images must be prohibited some authors claim images by definition come with a deceptive power, “Bilder sind wirklichkeitsnah und wahrheitsfern.” (Liebert & Metten 2007) Others state that the more scientific images are produced to capture truth the more artificial their appearance is (Bredekamp et al. 2003). In face of the observation that images gain more and more power in modern societies a demand for an ethical discourse regarding the “ecology of images” and the need for a critical evaluation of their political and economic powers were expressed (Sauerländer 2004, 424). Scholars claim to take the consequences of an emerging visual culture seriously:

9 Some examples of such manipulations were presented in the exhibition X für U. Bilder, die lügen at Haus der Geschichte Bonn. http://www.hdg.de/bonn/ausstellungen/archiv/1998/bilder-dieluegen.



1.4 Research Questions 

 17

Since the 1980s the rhetoric of images has become far more pervasive, so that it is now commonplace in the media to hear that we live in a visual culture, and get our information through images. It is time, I think, to take those claims seriously. (Elkins 2008, 4)

All these aspects are doubtlessly legitimate and relevant, but do such concerns bother scholars in their professional work with images? Without understanding how visual information can be controlled and what kind of manipulations are to be considered appropriate or not, one might claim, the work with images in certain fields must become a familiar risk factor.

Fig. 7: Waiting for a “Lunch Talk” presentation at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on September 23, 2014 (from left to right: Wolfgang Schäffner, Phillip Tettenborn, Horst Bredekamp, and Ronald Goebel). Photograph TB.

Consequently, this study is going to focus on two main issues: firstly, I raise the question what kind of manipulations scholars from different fields consider appropriate or inappropriate. Secondly, I am going to examine how scholars cope with control limits. Certainly, depending on the role images play for their work, some academic fields are more interested in the establishment of guidelines than others. Furthermore, there are claims that a lot of unacceptable image

18 

 1 Introduction

manipulations do not occur due to fraudulent intentions but because of ignorance regarding standards and rules: In 1989–90, only 2.5% of allegations examined by the US Office of Research Integrity, which monitors misconduct in biomedical research, involved contested scientific images. By 2001, this figure had jumped to nearly 26 %. But such miscreants are in the minority. The more pressing problem, say experts, is that innocent efforts to smarten or prettify images end up with unintended consequences. (Pearson 2005, 952)

In face of such observations, it has to be examined whether guidelines can be regarded as an appropriate way of establishing and preserving good scholarly practice in dealing with images. Concerning this field of interest, this study will focus on the following questions:

Research Question: Which guidelines or practical logics shape the scholarly work with images? Sub-Question 1: Which guidelines do scholars apply when producing or editing images? Sub-Question 2: Where do scholars from different fields draw the line between legitimate image editing and levels of manipulation that turn into fraudulent intent? Sub-Question 3: How do scholars or scientists cope and deal with guidelines or provisions having reached limits? One of the basic inherent assumptions of this work is that disciplinary as well as individual aspects shape how scholars work with images. Though this analysis is not representative, it aims at providing a better understanding of the factors that shape image work and it examines how scholars from fundamentally different fields perceive and deal with image manipulations and this is why consequently the laboratory offered an ideal starting point for such an investigation.

2 Theoretical Framework 2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis Observing the activities at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory Image Knowledge Gestaltung soon turned out to be challenging in a variety of ways. First, the project defines itself as experimental (for an impression from the “Experimental Zone” see cover image & Fig. 8), which is expressed in the term “laboratory” and thus creating an obvious association, “Indeed, the popular image of the scientist remains that of a white-coated figure, surrounded by laboratory apparatus, peering into a test tube.” (Macdonald & Basu 2007, 1) Yet in this laboratory researchers from different research domains gathered to develop their projects or to organize events like workshops or internal training sessions, mostly related to questions of visual knowledge production or interdisciplinarity. The guiding principles of the whole autonomous workflow were self-organization and networking. In order to develop an understanding of the group’s everyday life – of its routine – the methods selected for the ethnographic observation had to take these realities into account in the way that Clifford Geertz did with regard to the Moroccans: Understanding a people’s culture exposes their normalness without reducing their particularity. (The more I manage to follow what the Moroccans are up to, the more logical, and the more singular, they seem.) It renders them accessible: setting them in the frame of their own banalities, it dissolves their opacity. (Geertz 1973, 7)

But certainly there are more aspects that set apart a group of scholars from “those Moroccans.” It might nevertheless be rewarding to ask what “normalness” means in a laboratory committed to an experimental work mode? What kinds of experiments were expected to take place there? Is it enough to just describe what is visible on the surface, like Geertz proclaimed, and thus not complicating the world? The world is what the wide-awake, uncomplicated man takes it to be. Sobriety, not subtlety, realism, not imagination, are the keys to wisdom; the really important facts of life lie scattered openly along its surface, not cunningly secreted in its depths. There is no need, indeed it is a fatal mistake to deny, as poets, intellectuals, priests, and other professional complicators of the world so often do, the obviousness of the obvious. Truth is as plain, as the Dutch proverb has it, as a pikestaff over water. (Geertz 1987, 282)

It is self-explanatory that when methods are calibrated for data production and analysis in an ethnographic observation, they carefully have to be evaluated for

20 

 2 Theoretical Framework

appropriateness (Lüders 2007). But how is the term “ethnography” understood and used in the context of this work? It is in my understanding that ethnography comprises all activities that aim at explaining and understanding how and why people behave in a specific way. Ethnography in that sense is an attempt to reconstruct the underlying motivations of a certain behavior, of explaining their cultural and social roots. Wietschorke is in favor of such a definition of the term, when explaining:

Fig. 8: Elements for a planning model at “Experimental Zone” at Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Photograph TB, 2015. Ethnographie steht (…) für eine theoretisch gebundene Perspektive auf soziales Handeln und kulturelle Bedeutungsproduktion, die von den – historischen wie gegenwärtigen – Akteuren ausgeht und deren Innensicht zu rekonstruieren versucht. (Wietschorke 2010, 221)

In order to approach scholars from different fields and to make their motivations understandable a mix of established and of more experimental methods were applied. All measures aimed at initiating conversations about the production, the processing and the use of images.

2.1.1 Pilot Phase: Participant Observation & Ethnographic Exhibition The ethnographic observation began in the form of participant observations with rather random encounters at first, with every-day conversations and visits in



2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis 

 21

some of the constitutive meetings of the base projects and the recording of events and collection of various impressions, observations and sometimes even objects. (cf. Fig. 9)

Fig. 9: Negative form of a “Cluster Cup”: object collected from a trash bin at the laboratory. The award was designed for the winner of a playful contest at the first retreat – the annual conference of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Photograph TB, 2013.

Some of those impressions were later condensed into fictional stories that I shared with members of the laboratory to see whether they confirmed my observations: The end result (of ethnographic fiction, TB) is a powerful story that has the potential to provoke multiple interpretations and responses from readers who differ in their positioning to the story provided. (Sparkes 1997, 33)

Since one of the early aims was to record typical interactions and to understand how the groups organized their work, images seemed a rewarding topic. They offered a common ground for conversations and presentation of divergent views and practices, in other words: they promised to become an excellent starting point for an ethnographic interview project. In early 2013 a first series of interviews involved 13 members of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory (of different disciplinary backgrounds, gender, age and status). The members were invited to present three images from their work in a thirty-minute talk, so that researchers from other fields (or additionally an audience from outside academia) could grasp their significance. An interview guideline was developed, but the participants were at liberty to exceed beyond the limits of what was asked. The first interview series

22 

 2 Theoretical Framework

was finished by August 2013 and the material gained was analyzed, summarized and re-formulated for an exhibition that opened up room for more interactions among the researchers.10 In accordance with the experimental character of the entire project the exhibition served as an experimental forum for interactions. Sharon Macdonald outlined the potential of exhibitions for experimental purposes: (…) what exhibitions offer is the opportunity to mix media and to draw from different disciplinary traditions, and in the process to explore their differential potentials. Exhibitions also typically reach a wider public than do academic texts and offer different possibilities for engaging them – including physically and within the exhibition space itself (…). (Macdonald 2007, 8)

In the exhibition the use of images was portrayed with a focus on their visual language thus rendering discussions and comparisons possible. All texts were developed in close cooperation with the participants. From interactions during the feedback phases it became clear how essential it was for most of the participants to have control over how the public (inside and outside the research project) perceived their statements and opinions. Exhibiting images from their work was like revealing a hidden part of their selves, of creating a self-image. It turned out that the majority of members were aware of the advantages of self-­ representation and at the same time tried to contribute to the shared values of the community. Goffman characterized such patterns: Thus, when the individual presents himself before others, his performance will tend to incorporate and exemplify the officially accredited values of the society, more so, in fact, than does his behavior as a whole. (Goffman 1956, 23)

One of the reasons for setting up an exhibition was to establish a temporary “laboratory outside of the laboratory” and to invite researchers to engage in conversations not only about their own visual work but also about how they professionally conceive images from other academic fields. As part of this experiment researchers were confronted with reworked photographs that playfully portrayed the interview situation, but manipulated them in order to trigger reactions and to initiate discussions about the potentials of visual material. (cf. Figs. 12–15)

10 “‘Speaking Images – Speaking of Images.’ An ethnographical exhibition on the use of images at the Cluster of Excellence Image Knowledge Gestaltung. An Interdisciplinary Laboratory.” December 5, 2013 – February 5, 2014. https://www.interdisciplinary-laboratory.hu-berlin. de/de/veranstaltungen/speaking-images-speaking-images. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis 

 23

Fig. 10: “Laboratory Talks” during the exhibition „Speaking Images – Speaking of Images.” Photograph TB, January 30, 2014.

A number of two-hour workshops – the so called “Laboratory Talks” (cf. Figs. 10 & 11) – were organized in which members of the staff (investigators, researchers, students) and guests from outside the laboratory discussed whether (and under which preconditions) images were effective instruments to convey scientific information. Under consideration were also the limits of images as carriers of information. Most of the participants in these workshops seemed to enjoy this intellectual exchange. Though people shared a wide variety of different opinions about how the information in images could be understood, and about the factors that influenced this process, there were some aspects that turned up repeatedly in the course of the discussions. There was agreement among numerous participants that images could only be understood within a given context and that images were never self-explanatory, especially when images were communicated across disciplines. Participants frequently debated how aesthetic aspects had an effect on how images were perceived and understood. Some of the participants in the workshops

24 

 2 Theoretical Framework

were convinced that aesthetics mainly played a role in attracting attention and thus influenced how information was perceived; others claimed that only images with little aesthetic value could be considered “good scientific images.”

Fig. 11: Group discussion: “Laboratory Talks” during the exhibition “Speaking Images” on January 9, 2013. Photograph TB.

Some of the participants said that beauty could limit the overall scientific value of images. One of the participants even claimed: “Good scholarly images are not supposed to look like advertisement images.” In one of the workshops I witnessed a debate about how the nature of scholarly images could best be defined and it became evident that scholarly images had to present data in a clear and unambiguous way. One participant expressed his opinion that (under certain preconditions) even manipulated images could produce valuable information and contribute to the process of scholarly knowledge production. When participants were asked to assess the information value of images (“welches der Bilder ist für dich am aussagekräftigsten”), they showed a tendency (apart from some exceptions) to choose images that were linked to their



2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis 

 25

own fields. When they tried to discern unknown images, they approached them by applying a number of different strategies: they tried to find associations or compared them to what they already knew; they used past experiences, disciplinary knowledge or other skills in order to interpret them. One of the participants claimed that without an understanding of image-producing practices, it was not possible for him to understand the information in images at all. The inherent structures in images could only be deciphered or decoded through language.

Fig. 12: Photo collage mixed with comic elements. Detail from exhibition poster: “Speaking Images – Speaking of Images.” Member of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory Michael Dürfeld (left) in conversation with the author. Collage and photograph TB, 2013.

Another participant went a step further and made the assumption that people were only able to see things they already knew (“man sieht nur das, was man schon kennt”). Moreover, one of the designers who participated in one of the workshops stated that scholarly insights could only be developed by means of “learning by doing.”

26 

 2 Theoretical Framework

Fig. 13: Images in the making: Image production for the exhibition. Photograph TB, 2013.

2.1.2 Interview Project: Scholarly Perspectives on Image Manipulation A second set of interviews – carried out between April and June 2014 – focused on the subject of image manipulation – the outcome of which mainly constitutes the framework of this study. As a consequence of the work setting and the comparative approach between researchers from inside and outside the research project the observation took place in a number of different sites. Encounters with participants took place in various locations such as museum and university offices or even outside the academic environment such as coffee houses, and last but not least in the meeting rooms of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Though not initially planned as multi-sited fieldwork, aspects of locality had to be taken into account – particularly as they had an impact on how things were communicated or perceived. It made a difference whether the participant was the host or the guest – it had not only an effect on her or his identity but also on my identity as the observer:



2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis 

 27

Fig. 14 & 15: Exhibition posters: Deborah Zehnder (left) and Carola Becker (right), 2013. In practice, multi-sited fieldwork is thus always conducted with a keen awareness of being within the landscape, and as the landscape changes across sites, the identity of the ethnographer requires renegotiation. (Marcus 1995, 112)

Some of the interview partners (mainly from the museum field) I recruited through my private network – some others I got in contact with in the context of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Not surprisingly, I experienced that the quality of a ­relationship with a participant significantly influenced the atmosphere during conversations and even changed the extent of how openly things were expressed, but of course – the exception confirmed the rule. Summing up, this ethnographic

28 

 2 Theoretical Framework

account includes insights from informal meetings and conversations, from participant observations as well as from group interactions, like workshops, but mainly from the above-mentioned series of expert interviews. A number of methods that worked well in the initial phase (like working with interview guidelines and audio recordings) were adopted for the second phase of this research project. Where serial photography was used in the first set for documentation purposes I worked with video taping in the second set in order to have the chance to later view and analyze certain sequences with scrutiny. While the first set of interviews focused exclusively on members of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory, the second included a reference group from the museum field. I asked myself whether museum staff – like curators, researchers or designers – were more practice-oriented or less concerned with theoretical aspects than scholars in the laboratory. How important was it for such image professionals to have an awareness of how they produce and manipulate images? Once again the interviews were organized in a semi-structured way to facilitate the comparison of standpoints, themes and topics. In order to investigate whether and how a disciplinary background shapes the extent to which members consider it desirable or necessary to work according to guidelines, representatives from four different fields were selected. Participants came from the fields of biology, art history, computer science and design. Though it was not always possible to find a perfect match, participants from the museum were selected from related fields or occupations (e.g. participants from biology were compared to those from the Museum of Natural History). Initially, 18 participants were part of this second interview project (ten from the museum field, eight from the Interdisciplinary Laboratory). One of the participants from the museum field later decided not to be part of this study – due to reservations concerning the ethnographic method. At the beginning of each conversation the participants were informed about the purpose of the interview and asked to sign a form of consent. At the same time a feedback phase was planned in order to involve participants as successfully as possible in the process of data analysis and (if possible) in text production. The interviews lasted approximately one and a half hours; the shortest took slightly less than an hour, the longest almost two hours. Participants had the opportunity to go into more detail wherever they considered it relevant and were at liberty to skip questions they did not want to answer (in fact, none of the members made use of this option). In the course of the conversations I took notes to keep track of what was said, because I was under the impression participants felt encouraged to share more insights once I started jotting down what they were saying. Shortly after the interview (ideally on the same day) I wrote an ethnographic report including observations regarding the formal situation in



2.1­ Methods and Stages of Data Production and Analysis 

 29

which the interview took place, aspects relating to the flow of conversations and specific characteristics (like disruptions, interruptions, anecdotes the members shared or conversations that took place right after the recording device had been turned off).

2.1.3 Asking the Editors As a final step the journal editors’ view will be included in this analysis (chapter 5). Since over the last decade editors have put major efforts into the establishment of guidelines in order to control image manipulation (cf. section 3.2.2) it seemed propitious to contrast the results from the interview sessions with their voices. From scientific editorials it becomes apparent how deeply publishers are concerned about a “crisis of trust” as to images. Accordingly, literature that discusses the role of guidelines examines how editors are trying to preserve best practice in scholarly image work: Their (the editors, TB) interventions can be seen as an attempt to redress perceived imbalances and to ‘draw a line’ for the scientific community regarding acceptable and unacceptable practices in image production. (Frow 2012, 2)

It was assumed that such regulative measures would in the end affect scientific practices. Not yet proven is, however, how such guidelines shape scholarly work with images or to what extent they are at all applied in scholarly everyday business. Nevertheless, by including their perspective, I hope to (at least symbolically) close the circle of communication between scholars and the editorial boards of scientific journals and contribute to a better understanding as to how differently these two groups conceive the challenges that image manipulations invoke.

2.1.4 Role of the Ethnographer For an observer the level of activities inside the Interdisciplinary Laboratory and the overall expectation to identify with the project represented an opportunity and a threat at the same time. It was on the one hand an opportunity in the sense that the self-definition of the group presented an atmosphere of mutual support and collaboration, which made it relatively easy to get access to participants who were willing to cooperate. From my experience collaborations with the informants did not necessarily imply shared interests or result in shared aims. I rather experienced the ethnographic encounters in the course of this project as a form of “temporary joint epistemic work.” Niewöhner has coined

30 

 2 Theoretical Framework

the phrase “co-laboration” in order to provide an alternative understanding of collaboration: Co-laboration is temporary joint epistemic work. It is non-teleological in character. It does not require a shared outcome. It is an undertaking with a disciplinary vanishing point that requires participants from different epistemic cultures. (Niewöhner 2015, 235)

Rather than a close interdisciplinary collaboration, in which the involved researchers organize work together and pursue shared aims, I experienced “joint epistemic work” in this context as temporary and time-limited encounters with the informants. Though they were mostly open to support the project, informants showed a keen awareness as to time and effort vs. the benefits of such “co-laboration.” On the other hand the demand for identification with the project posed a threat because there was a good chance of over-identifying with the project aims and consequently going native – meaning losing the critical distance as an observer and to naturalize in a group. Losing distance is traditionally identified with the loss of the observer perspective and the ensuing blindness towards the phenomena and dynamics observed and in consequence not being able to evaluate the experience in the end. In fact it is not easy to preserve a critical stance towards events in the field when assimilation is constantly demanded. At the same time keeping a “healthy” distance is not something that can be decided positively or negatively for all occasions, but rather a process that has to be reconsidered according to circumstances. However, Dwyer & Buckle have pointed out: Instead, we posit that the core ingredient is not insider or outsider status but an ability to be open, authentic, honest, deeply interested in the experience of one’s research participants, and committed to accurately and adequately representing their experience. (Dwyer & Buckle 2009, 59)

In contrast, Bernard mentioned that being a complete outsider is not an option when it comes to participant observation: “The most important thing you can do to stop being a freak is to speak the language of the people you’re studying – and speak it well.” (Bernard 1995, 145) At the same time some features allowed me to balance my role in the observation process: firstly, I was free to decide the hours that I spent at the laboratory and secondly I regularly had the chance to discuss my observations with scholars outside the laboratory. Another helpful factor was the writing of memos and field notes and even switching languages was effective for the purpose of establishing a certain degree of distance between the field and me.



2.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation 

 31

2.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation Data production and -analysis are tightly connected. There is no room here for lengthy discussions on the theoretical dimensions of qualitative research but there are certainly aspects that affect the outcome of an ethnographic observation. The roles participants adapt in an expert interview may serve as one example. Though in the course of the interviews it became clear that not all the members who dealt with aspects of image usage were up-to-date theoretically, only few openly acknowledged the limits of their knowledge, but rather improvised more or less elegant ad-hoc answers. Another aspect of participant observation is that people behave differently once they know that there is an observer in the room or a camera turned on – the so called observer or reactive effect (Schutt 2004). In some of the interviews I noticed an interesting interaction between interviewee and the use of the camera – some participants seemed nervously preoccupied with how the camera would portray them. Occasionally members asked me to confirm that the material was not used other than for the assigned purposes. (“You don’t put this on You Tube, do you?”) From such comments it becomes clear how interviews have a quality of staged performances and that observer effects are basically unavoidable under such circumstances. Like Monahan & Fisher explained, an awareness of such effects can be of much value when it comes to interpretation: What is important is that ethnographers interpret their data in light of the possibility that their informants are engaging in staged performances. (Monahan & Fisher 2010, 8)

and furthermore: Staged performances should be warmly accepted as gifts from informants; they are valuable treasures of meaning, abundantly wrapped in multiple layers of interest, assumption, and concern; they are alluring conceits overflowing with interpretive possibility. (Ibidem, 12)

But there are more aspects that constitute an interview setting and which have an effect on the potential outcome. Of course it not only makes a difference where an interview takes place and at what time it is scheduled, but also whether one or two people ask questions, how experienced the interviewer is or whether the interview is interrupted. It matters whether it is cold or hot, whether an informant is relaxed or in a hurry – to just mention a few aspects. Another interesting phenomenon was that people often started sharing significant insights after the recording devices were turned off. Sometimes I got the impression people carefully checked and controlled what they said – maybe because they were afraid that if they said too much it might portray them in a bad light. This implies that the participants have a clear notion of an ideal of good scholarly image work.

32 

 2 Theoretical Framework

Such aspects have to be carefully examined right before and in the course of the observation. The more data are recorded the harder it gets to keep track of all the observations, of all the impressions and thoughts, all the field notes and memos that build the framework or structure of a study: Je mehr Daten man sammeln kann, besonders qualitative Daten, desto schwerer wird die Aufgabe, sie zu organisieren und zu analysieren. (...) Details in der Datenerhebung sind immer wichtig, aber ohne ausreichenden Abstand davon verliert man leicht die nötige Distanz, um ein wirkliches ethnographisches Bild darzustellen zu können. Datenerhebung ist nicht Selbstzweck, sondern muss der Forschung die wichtigen Hinweise zur Beantwortung ihrer Fragen geben. (Seadle 2013, 138)

The best attitude for an ethnographic observation therefore is most likely one that constantly is under systematic scrutiny: Kennzeichnend für ethnographische Forschung ist deshalb der flexible Einsatz unterschiedlicher methodischer Zugänge entsprechend der jeweiligen Situation und des jeweiligen Gegenstands – wobei nicht nur der Einsatz der Verfahren der Situation angepasst wird, sondern unter Umständen auch die Verfahren selbst. (Lüders 2007, 393)

Stepping into the shoes of an ethnographer implies a careful and constant evaluation of all the applied methods and – if Clifford Geertz is correct – the conclusion is that a cultural analysis can hardly ever capture all aspects of a phenomenon: Cultural analysis is intrinsically incomplete. And, worse than that, the more deeply it goes the less complete it is. It is a strange science whose most telling assertions are its most tremulously based, in which to get somewhere with the matter at hand is to intensify the suspicion, both your own and that of others, that you are not quite getting it right. But that, along with plaguing subtle people with obtuse questions, is what being an ethnographer is like. (Geertz 1973, 29)

2.2.1 Qualitative Content Analysis Data from interviews and from participant observation, data from protocols or field notes are not objective records or mere summaries of what was observed, but they reflect a rather subjective selection and verbalization on the part of the ethnographer (Lüders 2007). It is the author who decides which questions to ask and which statements to include in the written account. Consequently, the outcome reflects a somehow subjective, though not necessarily random selection of observations and quotations. There is definitely no doubt that all methods have their limitations and that some prove better than others, depending on context, experience or the nature of the research questions.



2.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation 

 33

As a first step of data analysis, the audio recordings were transcribed – a formal requirement to transform the spoken word into a body of text. The resulting material was read, analyzed and annotated, clusters and topics identified and summarized and the material structured and condensed. This step aimed at a better understanding achieved by working closely with the text and to detect commonalities, leitmotifs and themes. The overall aim was to become deeply familiar with the text and to derive a better understanding of the essence of what the informants shared. Simultaneously I applied the instrument of Qualitative Content Analysis (Mayring 2011) in order to identify relevant topics from the deep structures of the material and to develop hypotheses for interpretation. This analytical method follows key elements from Grounded Theory (Glaser & Strauss) and aims at reducing complexity and identifying core statements: Induktives Vorgehen hat eine große Bedeutung innerhalb qualitativer Ansätze. Es strebt nach einer möglichst naturalistischen, gegenstandsnahen Abbildung des Materials ohne Verzerrungen durch Vorannahmen des Forschers, eine Erfassung des Gegenstands in der Sprache des Materials. (Mayring 2011, 83)

After working manually through the text, the transcripts were analyzed with the help of MAXQDA (a software tool for the analysis of qualitative research) and coded in order to get a more detailed picture of the entire material. Coding the text with the help of this tool became an eye-opener for many additional aspects that escaped attention in the first reading. The result was a large corpus of topics, codes and sub codes – a complex hierarchy that resulted in six main categories and about 4000 code entries (see 8.4). Working with MAXQDA helped to quickly trace phrases and compare paragraphs that were semantically linked and thus access to the deeper structures of the texts could be gained. All these steps helped to develop an overview and to detect relevant key aspects for interpretation. The constant changing of perspectives – the permanent changing from proximity to distance reminded me of what I learned about the work of taxonomists. Describing the complexity and function of an organism with regard to its inner structure and its outer forms bears some similarities to this form of giving meaning to something through language. After finishing a final version of the ethnographic accounts I invited the informants to assist me in proof reading and editing the texts in order to make sure all of them felt adequately portrayed.

2.2.2 Methodological Framework – An Information Ecology This ethnographic observation takes place in an information rich environment which manifests itself in a research project in which image workers from various

34 

 2 Theoretical Framework

disciplines meet, who apply and study a wide range of different image-producing techniques. The analysis is based on the theoretical concept of the so-called Information Ecology, which for example Capurro (1989) and Davenport (1997) applied to address information exchange on the level of global politics or on an organizational level. This is how Davenport characterizes the organizational environment of a company in ecological terms: In the overall ecology of a rain forest, for example, the environment of the treetops – which is exposed to the open sky and includes monkeys, butterflies, birds – differs from the shadowy world under the leaves (…) In any information ecology there are also three environments. The information environment of a company is the main focus of this book. But this environment is still rooted in the broader organizational environment surrounding it; both of these, in turn, are affected by the external environment of the marketplace. (Davenport 1997, 33)

This approach mainly offers the chance to find adequate metaphors for the many different perspectives in the interdisciplinary organization. Another influential model for this work surely is Nardi & O’Day’s book on Information Ecologies (Nardi & O’Day 1999) in which the authors promote a strong focus on the social relationships inherent in the use of information in contexts that are supported by and dependent on technologies. The social interactions that unfold among people that make use of information technologies is comparable to the interactions that can be observed when people work together in order to solve intellectual problems. Such is the case in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. In this setting the ecology metaphor allows to investigate the goals and values inside the community, to measure the impact of social interactions on intellectual concepts, and detect whether such concepts are shared outside the ecology: The notion of an ecology as we use it is metaphorical, intended to evoke an image of biological ecologies with their complex dynamics and diverse species and opportunistic niches for growth. Our purpose in using the ecology metaphor is to foster thought and discussion, to stimulate conversations for action. (Nardi & O’Day 1999, 50)

In this sense the ecology metaphor is applied as an instrument for reflection. Information in such a system can be considered an equivalent to wind, water, sunlight or soil in a biological ecosystem. Therefore some of the leitmotifs that Nardi and O’Day proposed are applied in this context, like the dynamics of change that affect an environment, the interactions and complex hierarchies of the system or the resources that influence the performance of the individual. Information in such ecology is no abstract term but plays a role for social interactions – it appears as a form of capital that keeps the beehive busy. Moreover, one could claim, without the flow of information such ecology would collapse and cease to exist.



2.2 Data Analysis and Interpretation 

 35

Fig. 16: Collaborative work (from left to right: Thomas Lilge, Anouk Hoffmeister, Friedrich Schmidgall, Alexander Struck). Photograph TB, 2013.

But let me carry this metaphor even a step further: looking at the social dimension of exchanging information might help to highlight how researchers relate to networks inside the ecosystem and to understand how this shapes intellectual concepts. Discussing identity could give insights into the informant’s values and beliefs. While looking at images as resources means to take a closer look at what informants try to achieve with images – at their aims and purposes. The ecology metaphor is applied to the microcosm of the individual researcher as well as to the macrocosm of the research project as a complex environment in which many factors (e.g. physical space, hierarchy, economic or intellectual aspects) interact. Taking these aspects into account first of all aims at a more comprehensive understanding of the rationalities that shape scholarly work with images. Through highlighting the ecological dimension in working with images, this looking “in the small” (cf. Nardi & O’Day 1999, 57) is the goal here in order to examine the microstructures of a system rather than the biggest picture possible. It could be claimed that by putting on ecological glasses some dimensions become visible that normally escape attention – without pretending to have seen the whole picture.

36 

 2 Theoretical Framework

Fig. 17: Joint work: Members of the laboratory receive equipment for the workshop on March 11, 2014 (from left to right: Friedrich Schmidgall, Christian Stein, unknown, Thomas Lilge, Amaya Steinhilber). Photograph TB.

3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works A number of events in recent years have profoundly changed how scholarly images (and the extent of what can be done with them) have been perceived. On the one hand digital image-processing tools became available to almost everybody and today it is easy to produce, to process and disseminate images without spending hours in the darkroom while on the other hand images can easily be analyzed and manipulations in digital images can be traced with the help of so called “digital forensic investigation tools” (Newman 2013). Simultaneously the constant development of image editing software has profoundly changed the academic publishing process. Some of these changes and their effects can be illustrated by looking at a number of image manipulation cases from the field of stem cell research that have occurred in recent years. Choosing stem cell research as an example does not imply that any such incidents have not occurred in other fields. However, these cases are extremely relevant insofar as they can be regarded as a wake-up call and starting point for initiatives performed and carried further by editors of distinguished scientific journals in order to protect the scientific community from harm. Editors developed strategies to fight illegitimate image manipulations and introduced new standards for image integrity in science. Some aspects of crucial importance are relevant here: How are cases of inappropriate or fraudulent image manipulation broadcast in public media and how do they affect the academic community? What consequences have been drawn from such cases and what concrete guidelines have been established in order to prevent future scandals and public uproar?

3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud A drastic case of scientific fraud involving image manipulation was the case of the formerly celebrated, but later infamous Korean stem cell researcher Woo Suk Hwang (Sang-Hun 2009). His case can be seen as a major bombshell for not only stem cell research but for research in general, but is by far not the only case in which image manipulations played a role. Another incident discussed here is the “STAP cell case” (Obokata & Sasai) that had severe consequences and repercussions for RIKEN University, Japan. It also involved a team at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston. Both cases received worldwide media attention, not because image manipulation itself was of general interest but because in both cases the proclaimed findings appeared to be groundbreaking and therefore

38 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

automatically attracted a lot of public attention. Both cases demonstrated how easy it was to fabricate data and how images generated the impression of valid data. But the improper use of images does not always indicate fraud, which the case of Shoukhrat Mitalipov shows. The Oregon based researcher also attracted a lot of media attention because of his “innocent mistakes” (Cyranoski & Hayden 2013) in one of his stem cell publications.

3.1.1 The Hwang Case Hardly any other scholar shocked the scientific community like Korean stem cell researcher Woo Suk Hwang from Seoul National University in 2004/2005. In two articles published in the internationally renowned journal Science Hwang and colleagues reported a major breakthrough concerning the development of pluripotent stem cell lines from cloned embryonic stem cells.11 For a couple of weeks he was catapulted to the top of international stem cell research. It seemed as if he had managed to achieve what other scientists only dreamt of for long. Developing such multi-functional stem cell lines was associated with aspirations of fighting diseases like Alzheimer’s, Diabetes mellitus or Parkinson’s disease, or even with the control of aging processes of body cells in general. Consequently, innovations in this field promised not only academic honor, but also significant economic rewards. The effectiveness of his approach seemed to be a game changer. A world stem cell hub at Seoul National University Hospital was set up and Hwang became designated head of the institution.12 But shortly after his second publication media reports questioned the results of his research. A former doctoral student of Hwang, Young-Joon Ryu claimed – first as a whistle blower, later publicly – that the results were not valid (Cyranoski 2014). As a long-term research associate in Hwang’s team Ryu had insider knowledge and doubted the far-reaching conclusions that were proclaimed in both publications. When Ryu learned about Hwang’s plans for clinical testing in which he intended to cure a 10-year-old suffering from spinal injuries, he felt compelled to take action. Later he reported, “The nature of the Hwang scandal is the abuse of

11 Woo Suk Hwang et al. 2005. “Evidence of a Pluripotent Human Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned Blastocyst.” Science, vol. 303 (5664): 1669–1674. DOI: 10.1126/science.1094515; Woo Suk Hwang et al. 2005. “Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human SCNT Blastocysts.” Science, vol. 308 (5729): 1777–1783. DOI: 10.1126/science.1112286. 12 http://www.kooperation-international.de/en/detail/info/world-stem-cell-hub-launched-inseoul.html. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud  

 39

other people’s sacrifice and other people’s lives for personal success.” (Cyranoski 2014) As the details of Hwang’s papers were examined more closely, it became evident that the celebrated stem cell expert had unethically forced two members of his project to donate eggs for his research in order to fake results. Further investigations carried out by a television channel showed that more of the presented results were fabrications and finally Seoul National University decided to launch a comprehensive investigation. In early 2006 the university confirmed that Hwang’s results were entirely manufactured and fake. Out of 11 stem cell lines only two turned out to be autonomous and those were the ones that his colleagues had donated and consequently did not originate in cloned embryonic stem cells, like Hwang had previously claimed. The damage done to the university, first and foremost to the reputation of Korean researchers and to the international scientific community was immense (Zinkant 2005). Though Hwang’s research based on purely fictional data (and partly on wishful thinking) his manipulations were not uncovered during the reviewing process. After the fraudulent intent was eventually detected the responsibility of editors was called into question and the investigating committee at Seoul National University critically asked how these articles could have passed the review process (Rossner 2007). An initiative of notable stem cell researchers from all over the world asked Hwang to share his data with independent evaluators so that the results could be reproduced. A “Science Editorial Statement Concerning Stem Cell Manuscripts by Woo Suk Hwang, et al.”13 (January 12th 2006) reports: 13 December, 4:45 pm U.S. ET -- Science editors confirmed that they have now received a letter from eight scientists, stating that “accusations made in the press about the validity of the experiments published in South Korea are, in our opinion, best resolved within the scientific community.

Furthermore it says in a letter, signed by Ian Wilmut of Edinburgh University and others: We encourage Hwang’s laboratory to cooperate with us to perform an independent test of his cell lines to determine their nuclear and mitochondrial genotype in comparison with the donors of the original cells.

Their initiative can be seen as an effort to prevent the scientific community of stem cell research as well as the journals from more harm and to limit the

13 http://www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/misc/webfeat/hwang2005/science_statement.pdf. Accessed: January 12, 2016.

40 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

damage. After the final report of the university’s investigation committee had been launched it was publicly discussed how such cases of scientific misconduct could be prevented in the future.14 In early 2007 Mike Rossner, then editor-in-chief of the journal Cell Biology (Rockefeller University Press) pointed out with regard to the Hwang case, “But by their very nature, digital images can be easily examined for evidence of manipulation.” (Rossner 2007, 132) In an earlier article he had already analyzed the image manipulation in Hwang’s article: One of the supplemental figures that Hwang and colleagues published in the now infamous stem cell cloning paper4 contained manipulated images. The image in the figure, part B is from the third row of Supplemental Figure S1B in that paper. It purports to show negative staining for a particular cell-surface marker in four different cell lines. A simple adjustment of tonal range clearly shows that the two middle images are identical. The minor differences in pixel structure are due to image compression. (Rossner 2006)

What Rossner basically puts forward is that – whenever there are doubts – applying scaling experiments would help to detect fraudulent manipulations. Obviously back in 2004/2005 there were no systematic regulations or procedures in use to detect manipulations in images as a safeguard against image falsification. One of the immediate consequences of the scandal was that the Korean investigation committee demanded a joint international effort to develop binding standards. The consternation Hwang’s case caused and the controversy about research integrity that ensued had an impact far beyond the academic field of stem cell research. In the aftermath of the wide media attention and the intense discussions among scientific editors, the events of 2004/2005 could be interpreted as a turning point in dealing with image manipulations. Though influential editors addressed the problem and published standards and recommendations, a consistent approach to dealing with the problem was not found and agreed upon. Detecting manipulations alone was not considered the ultimate answer to the problem. On the contrary – Mike Rossner was concerned about researchers having been confronted with the allegation of having provided inappropriate data: It is likely that we would have identified this duplication with our routine screen. It is important to note, however, that this would only have led us to request the original data from the authors, who could have dishonestly claimed to have made a clerical error and provided different images. This illustrates a potential limitation of our investigative capabilities, but

14 See for a detailed timeline of the events: http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051219/full/ news051219-3.html. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud  

 41

editors will be surprised at how easily a deception can unravel if they start asking questions. (Rossner 2006)

All in all the Hwang case is certainly extreme and exceptional in its dimensions because Hwang intentionally faked his results. It should be noted that once criminal energy is at work it becomes harder to detect manipulations which is also true for skillful art forgery. Following Mike Rossner standard screening would help to detect the majority of manipulations. Obviously workflow management in many journals needed to be reconsidered in order to meet the demands of the digital age. But despite the fact that guidelines and standards were eventually developed and published (cf. section 3.2.2), similar incidents could not be prevented.

3.1.2 The Obokata/Sasai Case In early 2014 Japanese and American researchers (Riken University; Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard University) announced a sensational finding in the journal Nature: By exposing blood cells of newborn mice to slightly acidic environments the researchers claimed that it was possible to develop pluripotent stem cells – so called “STAP cells”15 – that could potentially adapt to the function of any other body cell. Only a week later expert bloggers on PubPeer – a forum for post publication discussions – found anomalies in one and later in several of the published images.16 Due to the enormous reputation that was attributed to this research project it attracted international attention soon. The New York Times reported on April 1, 2014: Tokyo — A study once hailed as a breakthrough in creating stem cells contained fabricated and doctored images that cast doubt on its findings, a Japanese research institute concluded on Tuesday in a blistering investigation into a case that has become a major embarrassment for the country’s scientific community. (Fackler 2014)

In mid February 2014 first doubts concerning the images and the overall data had been expressed. Obokata was accused of having used images twice and of having recycled images from her 2011 doctoral thesis without referencing them. (Normile 2014a). At this stage Obokata still denied any wrongdoing, but only admitted that

15 The acronym stands for “Stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency.” Cf. Obokata et al. 2014. “Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency.” Nature 505 (January 30, 2014): 641-647. DOI: 10.1038/nature12968. 16 https://pubpeer.com/publications/8B755710BADFE6FB0A848A44B70F7D. Accessed: February 3, 2016.

42 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

she had recycled images in order to make the publication look more convincing. Acting on impulses and reflexes she defended herself by claiming that she was never really educated in working with images professionally. The panel also found that she had manipulated images by cutting and pasting them together. It said she told the panel that she did this to make the image appear neater, and that she did not know that this was unethical. (Fackler 2014)

More disturbing details were soon unveiled. Shortly after (in March 2014) co-author Wakayama of Yamanashi University decided to withdraw the publication. In April an investigative committee of the university officially attested scientific misconduct (Normile 2014b). Although she was by far not the only one responsible for the papers, first author Obokata became the main target of public criticism and media attention. The case attracted worldwide media coverage and many newspapers, television channels and countless websites reported in detail on each new revelation: Allegations related to the papers and other publications by this team include multiple instances of plagiarism, image duplication, image manipulation, and more. This is serious stuff.17

What followed was nothing less than the public ostracization of Obokata: The news media, having built her up, was more than happy to tear her down. A tearful Obokata faced a gruelling press conference, broadcast live on TV.  Standing amongst a battery of microphones, strobe-lit with camera flashes, she apologised, bowed, answered questions, bowed, apologised some more, and bowed. (Rasko & Power 2015)

The sad climax of the scandal was reached with the suicide of Yoshihiki Sasai, supervisor to Obokata on August 5, 2014 (Yamaguchi 2014). On the day of Sasai’s suicide the Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun reported that RIKEN president Ryoji Nyori ordered the evaluation and revision of all RIKEN University’s publications for image manipulation and plagiarism (Normile 2014b). For the university this meant the evaluation of up to 20,000 publications and even more consequences were announced: RIKEN also admitted that its whole system of oversight had failed and promptly set about overhauling the CDB (Center for Developmental Biology, TB) from top to bottom, stripping away half of its 500-odd staff, renaming it and installing a new management team. (Rasko & Power 2015)

17 http://www.ipscell.com/2014/03/harvards-role-in-stap-stem-cell-debacle. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud  

 43

It is worth mentioning that Obokata was not suspended immediately. She was offered to stay on the laboratory team though under close observation to assist a team of researchers trying to reproduce the results of her team. Only after this attempt eventually failed in December 2014 Obokata resigned from her position. At Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital Charles Vacanti who was responsible for the collaboration in the field of STAP research went on a long sabbatical.18 Surprisingly like in the Hwang case images did not trigger the scandal, but played a key role in detecting any wrongdoing. In the eyes of later commentators the scandal happened due to a mixture of “carelessness (…) hubris and the drive to make a historic discovery” happen (Rasco & Power 2015). However, the motivations for scientific misconduct are not under discussion here. The main focus is on the rather dire consequences of attempts at manipulations through images.

3.1.3 The Mitalipov Case Whereas in the above-mentioned cases images were used to simulate and fake results or to make research findings look better – the majority of image manipulations does not happen due to fraudulent or criminal intentions. The intention is usually not to deceive but to make the story more striking by presenting clear-cut, selected or simplified data – an approach we have dubbed ‘data beautification’. (Beautification and Fraud 2006, 101)

Consequently plagiarism or fraud are not at the forefront of motivational behavior patterns but rather the intention to make images appear as appealing as possible that must concern editors and the broader scientific community. Another case that made the scientific community hold its breath and shook its confidence was the case of stem cell researcher Shoukhrat Mitalipov (Oregon Health and Science University). When he published an article in Cell in 2013 in which he introduced a new procedure of creating human stem-cell lines through cloning19 it was instantly regarded as a major achievement. Nature author David Cyranoski points out that, “The lines are expected to answer fundamental questions about the way in which cells are reprogrammed and also to have potential 18 http://retractionwatch.com/2014/08/12/harvard-stem-cell-scientist-vacanti-taking-leave-inwake-of-stap-retractions. Accessed: January 31, 2016. 19 Shoukhrat Mitalipov et al. 2013. “Human Embryonic Stem Cells Derived by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer.” Cell, vol. 153, no. 6 (June 6, 2013): 1228-1238. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.006. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867413005710. Accessed: February 3, 2016.

44 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

therapeutic applications.” (Cyranoski 2013) Mitalipov was no newcomer to the field and he already had a reputation for developing the “spindle-transfer technique” that allowed the removing of a nucleus from “a human egg and placing it into another”20 and thereby he successfully managed to breed rhesus macaques, which – from a genetic point of view – had three parents (McVeigh 2009). Soon after the publication of his workgroup’s paper an anonymous blogger at PubPeer21 noted that there were inconsistencies to be found in the paper – which Mitalipov soon admitted. He nevertheless claimed that these were “innocent mistakes” (Cyranoski & Hayden 2013) and that his results were valid and that the mistakes occurred due to time pressure. What indeed happened was that his team had used three sets of duplicates, two of them intentionally, but for a third pair the labels were “mistakenly reversed.” In addition, “an incorrect scatterplot was included in a table examining the patterns of gene activity in the cloned stem-cell lines.” (Cyranoski 2013) Remarkably, the review process for the paper only took a few days, which even for a very promising research paper appears to be more than fast. The question “How fast is too fast for the review of a scientific article” (Cyranoski 2013) soon was raised and consequently the peer review process itself was critically questioned. Mitalipov argued that he wanted to publish his results as soon as possible in order to be able to present them at a stem cell research conference in June 2013. “Maybe that was too hasty. That was my mistake” (Stockrahm, Klöckner, Lüdemann 2013), he admitted later. On June 6, 2013 the journal Cell published an erratum relating to “a number of figure-related and typographical errors that appeared in the article.” Cell claimed that “none of the errors affect the conclusions of the paper” and that “no evidence of fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism” was detected that “would warrant further inquiry or investigation into research misconduct”22 and that no evidence was found justifying the retraction of the paper. Soon after Mitalipov and colleagues had published their corrections their innocence was commonly accepted and scholars agreed that this team had no

20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoukhrat_Mitalipov 21 Find the discussion at: https://pubpeer.com/publications/F0CFE0360002C25DC0BEFE28987D70. Accessed: January 16, 2016. 22 In the erratum to Mitalipov’s article it is stated that: “The corrections detailed here have been incorporated into the online version of the article, and they do not alter the description of the results or the main conclusions. We would also like to note that the Scientific Integrity Committee at Oregon Health & Science University has carefully assessed the paper and the errors and has concluded that there is no evidence of fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism that would warrant further inquiry or investigation into research misconduct.” Retrieved from: http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867413008246. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



3.1 Image Manipulation between Ignorance and Fraud  

 45

intention of faking results. However, it is worth mentioning that stem cell pioneer Shoukhrat Mitalipov only recently (February 2015) joined forces with stem cell fraudster Woo Suk Hwang (Mi-Young & Normile 2015). Together they announced a shared research project to study “the mechanisms of cloning” and set it up in China in order to avoid bioethics regulations in Korea and the United States. Thus both engage in the field of “curing maternal line genetic diseases” and share an interest in commercializing future results from collaborative research. Mitalipov earlier founded the company MitoGenome Therapeutics to commercialize his results while Hwang does cloning at Sooam Biotech Research Foundation23 – a private institution that offers a cloning service for customers who wish to have cloned “copies” of their deceased pets. For Mitalipov’s and Hwang’s collaborative endeavor a third party, the company Boyalife24 announced to invest 93 million $ which illustrates how commercial interests stimulate competition in the field. These three examples clearly demonstrate how image manipulation has become an important issue in the academic world. There is a lot of competition in many fields and this might be one reason why scholars do not care enough about image editing. However, Mitalipov’s version that the errors in his article “just happened” is likely to be true. Apart from that it is noteworthy that the numerous people who were involved in the research and review process did not realize the mistakes made right before their very eyes. This seems even more disturbing given the ethical, scientific and economic implications of Mitalipov’s findings. Without doubt, many factors influence such a reviewing process and it is absolutely indispensible to take into consideration how the editors’ interests differ from those of scholars or bloggers who engage in post publication platforms. As a consequence of the above-mentioned incidents, the Journal of Cell Biology launched a comprehensive study dealing with the use of images in publications: The study found that 10% of articles accepted for publication included inappropriate manipulations of image data that contravened journal policy, even if they did not alter the conclusions drawn from the data. (Martin & Blatt 2013)

The most common manipulations found were those around the use of duplicates, the cropping of images without documentation and the cleaning up of images. Journal editors took action and proposed rules in order to standardize the peer review process and to prevent future scandals involving image manipulations which here will be dealt with in detail.

23 http://en.sooam.com/index.html. Accessed: February 3, 2016. 24 http://www.boyalifegroup.com/english/introduction.aspx. Accessed: February 3, 2016.

46 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines The Hwang case – and years later the Obokata/Sasai case – deeply disconcerted the research community worldwide and drew attention to the fact that dealing with digital image data deserved a more careful approach. The reputation of scientific journals like Science, Cell or Nature was regarded as seriously endangered and the nervous attention the Mitalipov case initially attracted, reveals how sensitively the scholarly community reacted to the prospect of another fraud scandal. But in this case again the journal editors had to justify and defend themselves as they were blamed for publishing the paper too quickly. Certainly it is not appropriate to solely accuse editors and make them bear the brunt for the mistakes of others – but questions concerning responsibility played a role in the following discussion about pertinent guidelines for the handling of image data. Most of the contributors to this debate either came from influential journals like the Journal of Cell Biology, Nature or Science, which were directly affected by the scandals or from institutions that are concerned about scientific integrity, like the Council of Science Editors, the Office of Research Integrity or the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The following impressions show how journal editors portrayed the situation.

3.2.1 Editorial Statements in the Aftermath of the Scandals Editors of journals have responded to the topic of (fraudulent) image manipulation in countless articles and openly shared their standpoints. Many of those commentaries appeared shortly after the Hwang scandal occurred. A Nature Methods Editorial summarized the predominant attitudes and opinions at the time in question: While the dust slowly settles over a staggering case of scientific fraud, a bitter aftertaste lingers with scientists and editors alike – that of having been deceived by grossly manufactured evidence. (A picture worth 2006)

Since then this topic has been on the agenda of the scholarly community. In their commentaries editors documented how deep the resulting feeling of insecurity was. Interestingly, not only the insight that the peer-review-system had failed but also the authors’ irritation as to new occurrences of fraud cases after the introduction of standards and guidelines was taken into consideration: Particularly informative are the statistics gathered by the Journal of Cell Biology, which for almost 4 years has been applying a systematic search for image manipulation in its



3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines 

 47

accepted papers before publication (The Scientist 20, 24; 2006). This scrutiny led to 1% of accepted papers to be revoked on the grounds that image manipulation affected the interpretation of data. Surprisingly, 25% of accepted manuscripts contained at least one inappropriately manipulated figure for which a satisfactory replacement could be obtained from the authors upon further investigation. These rates have not declined since the policy was implemented. (A picture worth 2006)

Some of the authors claim that intense competition in the academic day-to-day business is a reason for this high rate of illegitimate, careless and unethical manipulations. An editorial in the journal Cell Biology points out, “Ethics can fall by the wayside all too easily in today’s intense research atmosphere,” and additionally: By far and away the most prominent problem is that scientists do not take the time to understand complex data-acquisition tools and occasionally seem to be duped by the ease of use of image-processing programs to manipulate data in a manner that amounts to misrepresentation. (Beautification and Fraud 2006)

From looking at how image manipulations were discussed in the aftermath of the scandals it becomes clear that editors had no intention of blaming the “average scientist” for what had happened, “Scientists and editors need to train their eyes to the problem: be watchful, but not distrustful.” (Beautification and Fraud 2006) Of course detecting individual fraudsters is important, but generally controlling the scholarly practices of manipulating images remains a demanding task. The journal Nature Immunology openly addressed the Hwang case (among others) and the devastation it caused: Anyone following the media cannot have escaped the seemingly endless reports of scientific misconduct. Two high-profile cases, with former Massachusetts Institute of Technology immunologist Luk Van Parijs and the now-discredited South Korean stem cell researcher Hwang Woo Suk, involved image manipulations. (Spot Checks 2007)

Furthermore, it also becomes apparent that the scandals point at a far bigger problem, which manifests itself in the constant advancement of image editing software and its impacts. The temptations that come with the use of new technologies and techniques should also be taken into account: The advent of Photoshop and other imaging software has changed the landscape considerably, making it very easy, and perhaps tempting, to modify images. (Spot Checks 2007)

Editors do not want to assume the role of “data police” but still the inherent contradictions in this line of argumentation cannot be ignored: scientists are portrayed to be under a lot of pressure and tempted to make use of new technologies

48 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

to their advantage – even if this implies unethical behavior. At the same time they are expected to act responsibly and in accordance with ethical principles. In the face of such a dilemma it is not surprising that finally “impact-factor-hungry” funding agencies were held responsible for such undesirable developments: Scientific publishing has not escaped the influence of image-processing technologies. (…) Simultaneously, science output has grown more rapidly than either the availability of funding or places to publish – in fact, rising pressures to publish in prestigious journals has been driven by an increasingly competitive spirit among life science researchers encouraged by ‘impact-factor-hungry’ funding agencies. (Appreciating data 2006)

Another Nature editorial claims that image editing software per definition came with a power to seduce. Researchers were portrayed as victims of a beast named “beautification,” which threatens the integrity of data. The wording simply speaks for itself: Into this vacuum has crept ‘beautification’ – the digital manipulation of properly acquired data for the purpose of making a figure clearer, more perfect and more consistent with the best images yielded in such experiments. Removing dust from a digitized photo with the erasure tool, cropping bands from gels, and playing with fluorescence micrographs to enhance a particular effect are all attempts to show better results than were actually achieved in that run. (Not picture perfect 2006)

Image editing techniques thus appear like the “tree of knowledge” with manifold alluring powers scholars are confronted with, but expected to resist. Image editing is portrayed as a form of transgression that threatens the integrity of the image. The above statement only reflects the dilemma but does not present any solutions. The question remains whether the problem can be solved through the establishment of standards at all. It is remarkable that this call for action was still valid even years after: Proven cases of misconduct in science are rare but they do happen, and this means the research community – including journal publishers – must have policies to prevent and detect misconduct. (Image rights and wrongs 2010)

A number of journals and organizations concentrating on the integrity of research ever since then have developed scholarly standards for image manipulations. It is not surprising that researchers from the field of biology started to define guidelines, because this field was affected rather early by scandals. In the following the most important and relevant guidelines are briefly summarized. Protecting against and countering inappropriate image manipulation require profound knowledge of its mechanisms as a precondition for the establishment of practical guidelines.



3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines 

 49

3.2.2 The Establishment of Guidelines and Recommended Measures In order to preserve the integrity of research it is first of all essential to distinguish between what is considered legitimate and illegitimate image manipulation. Accordingly the Council of Science Editors proclaimed in its 2012 White Paper on Publication Ethics: First, it is of the utmost importance that authors of a manuscript understand what image data manipulations are considered acceptable and do not engage in unacceptable or fraudulent image data manipulations. (CSE’s White Paper 2012, 66)

Even years after the Hwang scandal delineating a clear definition of what is regarded as acceptable still is a very difficult task. The process of image acquisition does not follow standardized steps, rules or procedures, but involves situation-related decisions and complex practices in which (often) more than just one researcher is involved. Consequently the White Paper stresses the responsibility of “all of the involved researchers” (as well as editors, cf. chapter 5) when it comes to publishing an article. Cromey (2010) points out that all associated scholars are expected to compare and check whether all images chosen for a publication adequately represent the original data. This can be seen as a framework, which prevents a single researcher from being in the position to manipulate research results of entire teams: Often younger members of the lab are more familiar with Photoshop than their research supervisors, so students become the creators of figures submitted for publication. Laboratory heads need to check the work of students and staff to ensure that image data are not over-processed or otherwise inappropriately processed. (Cromey 2010, 659)

Another basic guideline cited in the White Paper recommends documentation of all image editing steps e.g. to describe them in detail and to fully disclose them. Reviewers are expected to have sufficient expertise to evaluate the “quality and originality” of images and data and the editors of journals are supposed to critically question images in articles and demand further information from the authors whenever necessary. The Council of Science Editors promotes and recommends a multi-stage process of evaluation that involves self-regulation as well as the examination of image data by independent reviewers. It is generally assumed that all parties involved in the publication process have a shared interest in averting the publication of dubious data: This due diligence of all involved is important not only to publish accurate science, but also to avoid wrongful accusations (and associated consequences for the authors). (White Paper 2012, 66)

50 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

Talking along the lines of the Rockefeller University Press the White Paper distinguishes between “inappropriate” manipulation and “fraudulent” manipulation. Inappropriate manipulation is defined as the violation of guidelines without affecting the interpretation of the underlying data, whereas fraudulent manipulation is understood as the fabrication or falsification of data, which affects the interpretation of data. For the purposes of this section of the document, fraud is defined as falsification or fabrication of image data; it is not meant to encompass the legal criteria of intent or harm to a third party who relied on the data. (CSE’s White Paper 2012, 66)

But at the same time a certain degree of manipulation is considered not only common, but also widely perceived as legitimate or even unavoidable. A definition of what can be attributed “appropriate” thus can hardly be fully encompassing, and thus is prone to various and even divergent interpretations. Some keywords used in the White Paper can already be found in earlier journal publications: Moving, adding, removing, enhancing or obscuring features or sections of an image clearly count. ‘Cleaning up’ background or removing ‘nonspecific’ bands from a gel may seem innocent enough, but such changes may in fact alter useful information. (Spot Checks 2007, 215)

Another influential institution occupied with the establishment of standards is the United States Office of Research Integrity. Many editors in scientific journals nowadays refer to its standards. Accordingly an editorial in the journal Nature Nanotechnology outlines: The Office of Research Integrity in the United States defines research misconduct as ‘fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism’ and makes it clear that this can occur at any stage of the research process – from writing grant applications, to performing or reviewing research, and reporting results. (Image rights and wrongs 2010, 627)

In the understanding of the same journal the correct work with images implies the following features: Intentional distortion of data by moving, adding or removing parts of an image to misguide, downplay and/or emphasize certain features is not acceptable. The best policy to adopt is to submit images that are minimally processed and, if processing is necessary, retain all original files so they are readily available for assessment if needed. All the key settings and processing manipulations must be documented in the methods or supplementary sections. (ibid.)

In the meantime many of the journals have adopted such fundamental recommendations and specific instructions in their manuals for authors. For example Nature Methods provides the following instructions in their “editorial policies”:



3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines 

 51

Images submitted with a manuscript for review should be minimally processed (for instance, to add arrows to a micrograph).

Furthermore, A certain degree of image processing is acceptable for publication (and for some experiments, fields and techniques is unavoidable), but the final image must correctly represent the original data and conform to community standards.25

Referring to “community standards” implies that communities share more or less homogeneous practices. It remains to be seen whether such community standards really help to inform the individual scholar about what is considered appropriate and what not. However, looking closely at the guidelines, four basic principles can be distinguished: Image manipulations have to be appropriate, every step of manipulation has to be documented and published with the image and the manipulation has to be as unobtrusive as possible. Not all the journals particularly in biology and some other fields go as far in their recommendations similar to the ones cited above. There are some journals that only give technical advice concerning the quality and format in which figures and images have to be ­submitted. But even if all the journals shared an all-encompassing and binding codex – they would still not be able to answer all conceivable questions that come up in the process of image acquisition and editing. As attracting attention is a central aim, producing significant, informative, meaningful and appealing images is still highly rewarded. The individual researcher must consequently deal with answering the question of “how far one can go.”

3.2.3 Limits of Control: The Side Effects of Guidelines The above-mentioned scandals can be considered a wake up call for the scientific community and have been an eye-opener for the far-reaching consequences that new technology and techniques can bring about. The initial aim of the guidelines was to safeguard research integrity and not to make researchers solely responsible for preserving the integrity of images. Simultaneously it was stressed that guidelines alone could not cover every single aspect of image producing practice. According to Frow guidelines do not resolve fundamental questions concerning image-editing practices:

25 http://www.nature.com/nmeth/about/ed_policies/index.html. Accessed: February 3, 2016.

52 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

(…) journal editors must negotiate four complex and interrelated concerns: the relationship between image production and image processing; the line between appropriate and inappropriate image alteration; the relationship between authors and readers of journal articles; and the meaning of objectivity in the digital age. (Frow 2012, 384)

In her work Frow pointed out that editors rejected the claim they would mostly prefer beautiful, aesthetic pictures. On the contrary editors claimed that the “slightly dirty images” (Not picture perfect 2006, 892) would represent and reflect reality far better and that beautifications would only distort the original and authentic data: There is a myth that editors only like clean data that show striking effects. (…) Data should be clearly presented and concise, but not at the expense of important information. Let’s celebrate real data – wrinkles, warts and all. (Appreciating data 2006, 203)

and what is more, We should conspire to end the fetish of the perfect image. Let’s get a little more ‘real’. (Not picture perfect 2006, 892)

Consistently Frow asks what exactly can be deemed to be unaltered reality when it comes to digital images? The process of image acquisition naturally first and foremost has an essential influence with regard to “unaltered reality” as camera settings and positions define the shape, perspective and content of the resulting image. The basic idea is that a minimum of manipulation results in a minimum of data falsification. But again, such assumptions raise more questions than they answer: The guidelines for image preparation being developed by journals might thus be read as an intervention designed to limit actions in the name of beauty or aesthetics, and to safeguard the scientific skill involved in image production. (Frow 2012, 376)

Furthermore, Frow points out that a number of ethnographic studies (like KnorrCetina and Amann (1990) or Latour and Woolgar (1979)) have shown that a separation between scientific practice and beautification was not easy to accomplish, if at all. The call for a separation between the aesthetic and scientific side of images thus provides no working agenda for preserving image integrity, because it simply blends out an important dimension. In the White Paper it is claimed that appropriate image manipulation must adequately represent the guidelines and not affect the interpretation of an image and “authors must understand the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable manipulation” (CSE’s White Paper 2012, 66). The resulting situation is paradox insofar as the responsibility for preserving image integrity is given back



3.2 Preserving Image Integrity through Guidelines 

 53

into the hands of those who must have a motive for producing images that look as appealing as possible. Editors seem to be well aware of this problem and consequently try to educate researchers and help them to withstand the temptation of manipulation: (...) on one hand, images should convey information that convincingly supports a particular knowledge claim, and on the other they should provide an objective representation of some aspect of the natural world. (Frow 2012, 383)

But – as mentioned above – the idea of objectivity is problematic in itself. Different people with different skills and different aims may see different things in images and innovations in visualization techniques can change viewing habits over time. What today counts as real might in a few years appear in a fundamentally different light.

3.2.4 Conclusions The Hwang scandal and many more such incidents alike caused a feeling of insecurity in the scientific community. Guidelines were established to restore credibility in the scientific community and in the eyes of the public. At the same time guidelines do not answer all questions and do not cover all practices: they may be helpful to settle certain basic disagreements, but in many ways they reflect good intentions and an ideal of scientific integrity rather than to provide clear instructions. They reflect the scope of the crisis rather than that they provide a working solution. The dilemma of what can be done with images and what should be done with images persists, but of course changing the practices of people cannot become reality without considerable efforts and transparent rules: Journal editors are faced with the challenge of wanting to provide clear guidance for the scientific community yet not being in a position to prescribe in minute detail exactly how image preparation should be performed for all possible configurations of research questions, technologies and practices. (Frow 2012, 385)

The resulting dilemma can be summed up as follows: how can scholars apply guidelines for image manipulation if guidelines do not provide “minute detail”? How can “appropriateness” be understood when there is no clear definition of what it fully encompasses? How can one possibly avoid or prevent inappropriate “beautification” without taking into account the aesthetic dimension and value of images? Obviously editors are aware of such boundaries, manifesting themselves in constant reminders of the scholars’ individual responsibility. In the following

54 

 3 Case Studies. Image Manipulation in Scholarly Works

chapters the question is discussed how scholars from different fields make use of images in their work and whether they are of the opinion that guidelines are of any use as to how to control and minimize the temptation of the process of image manipulation. The subject under investigation is whether scholars relate to clearly defined guidelines, whether they are aware of “community standards” or other logics in their work or whether they reject the relevance of guidelines at all for whatever reasons.

4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project The following chapters reflect the outcome of an ethnographic observation focusing on the subject of image editing and image manipulation. Scholars from inside and outside the Interdisciplinary Laboratory and from various disciplinary fields share theoretical standpoints as well as practical aims, beliefs and values with regard to their usage or application of images and image manipulation. First and foremost, however, it must be mentioned that this work is not aimed at uncovering scientific misconduct. Nevertheless, in the course of the project I gained the impression that the use of the term image manipulation alone often suffices to raise a few eyebrows with some people. From my observations I began to ask myself whether such reactions were due to the fact that guidelines of image manipulation are in fact not all embracing, leaving room for interpretation and clearly show that there are boundaries to controlling image manipulation. At the same time this might be due to the fact that the term has rather negative connotations. What makes the issue even more complicated is that by far not all scholars are of the opinion that a shared disciplinary background results in shared practices. It has rather been said that, it is difficult to conceive of ‘image processing in the humanities’. It is even difficult to conceive of image processing within the limited area of history studies as a single field of interest’ (…). (Terras 2008, 134)

One could go even farther and call into question whether there is such a thing as a “single field of interest” and what is more of course scholars have diverse opinions of whether there is something to be learned from looking across disciplines. Nevertheless, this study assumes a comparative perspective and supposes that despite all discrepancies it can be rewarding to highlight and elucidate the commonalities among scholars from different fields. In consequence, a wide variety of imaging techniques is discussed in this study and it becomes evident that scholars have a disparate understanding of how directives can guide them in their work. Thus, in order to answer the core question of this work, a first approach on how scholars understand images on a theoretical level is relevant before proceeding to ask how they make use of images more practically. Before discussing how scholars actually understand and define images and which aims they intend to achieve with images the members of this interview project are briefly introduced.

4.1 Introducing the Informants Portraying the informants with regard to how they perceive and use images is demanding insofar as this study is based upon how they speak about and describe

56 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

their work – without physically being present in the process of image production. It has been claimed that understanding a certain imaging practice demands more than listening, but learning or imitating it: There is nothing unusual, of course, in the claim that one can only properly understand this or that practice by learning to do it oneself – by using one’s body in the same way as others, and in [sic!] same environment. (Ingold 2011, 11)

Nevertheless, understanding how informants use, process and manipulate images requires a thorough understanding of their mindsets, of their aims, their values and beliefs as well as their educational background and practical skills. Most of these aspects require to not only listen carefully to what informants say but also to critically question what motivates them and how they see their role in the work with images.

4.1.1 Design A characteristic feature of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory is the active participation of designers on all levels. Moreover, in the laboratory it is frequently discussed that a “design turn” would soon profoundly change scholarly work practices: Die Gestaltungspraktiken, die man als integrative Operationsformen verstehen kann, ermöglichen eine neue Kooperation der wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen. Dafür muss das Labor, das im 19. Jahrhundert als zentraler Raum der Forschung in den Natur- und Technikwissenschaften erfunden und entwickelt wurde, in eine Plattform verwandelt werden, auf der die Verfahren der Humanwissenschaften und der Designdisziplinen, die normalerweise nicht im naturwissenschaftlichen Labor präsent sind, einbezogen werden. (Schäffner 2014, 41)

In the past, intellectual interactions between designers and other scholars in academia were not very common and from some of the early encounters I had in the laboratory I learned that designers were occasionally confronted with the stereotype of being too practice-oriented. But speaking about “designers” is a blatant oversimplification because it refers to a somehow homogeneous group (“the designers”), but ignores the fact there is a large variety of all kinds of disciplinary sub-groups, like graphic designers, product designers or stage designers, and – as will be shown – not all designers understand images uniformly or only consider images equally relevant for their work. Though this work does not intend to focus on the above-mentioned fundamental “design-turn,” it identifies and highlights the theoretical and practical standpoints of designers and compares them to what scholars from other fields view as appropriate when it comes to the shaping of images. In the course of this interview project I met four designers – two designers from the laboratory and two designers from the museum sector: Carola Zwick – a



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 57

member of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory and principal investigator; Anouk Hoffmeister – a research fellow at the laboratory; Andreas Pinkow – a freelance designer who creates large scale installations, shows and exhibitions; Marc Tamschick – a designer who is an expert for media and space-installations in the cultural and commercial sector.

Carola Zwick: EVOLUTION, NOT REVOLUTION! When I meet Carola Zwick at the entrance door of the 7.5 design studio, located on the ground floor of a massive brick building, she welcomes me with a warm smile and walks me into an ample hall that measures approximately 20 meters in length. There she continues a conversation with colleagues that she has obviously interrupted shortly before. On top of a gigantic working table there are two full-scale models of office chairs and team members are discussing which of the models should best be boxed and send to a client. Carola Zwick offers me coffee and leads me into another huge room flooded with light that serves not only as an office, but also as conference hall and showroom. Chairs, elements and objects from the production portfolio as well as building elements and sketches stand or lie around and form a colorful creative mess. On the walls there are print outs of product presentations or sheets with sketches and renderings. On the long side of the room a gigantic screen is fixed to a wall. The screen is used for videoconferences with project partners from Michigan, Carola Zwick explains. PRODUCT DEVELOPER RUNS 7.5 DESIGN STUDIO

ADMIRES SIMPLE DESIGN ACADEMIC TEACHER

ART SCHOOL WEISSENSEE, BERLIN

Love for simplicity Carola Zwick explains that already as a child she had a very intimate relationship with design. She loved simple things – or more precisely, she loved products with simple forms, but such products turned out to be the most expensive ones and that was why soon people accused her of being immodest and luxury loving. While she is sitting behind a large table in her spacious, light flooded office, one gets an idea of what simplicity means to her. Everything appears simple – not

58 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 18: Carola Zwick: “You have to listen carefully to the materials you are working with!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

only the room and the products, but also the way in which she dresses. In her childhood she experienced her love for simplicity as a “curse,” she thoughtfully adds with just a touch of drama in her voice, but still smiling. Later she realized “thank God” that there was a profession enabling her to immerse herself in such issues and thus she managed to solve this conflict at least “to some extent”. Simple things in her eyes were objects that were well thought-out and most appropriate for a certain purpose: There is no stupid flesh on our products and that means that we consider the aesthetics of constructing our products as well as aspects of recycling. To think about the entire life cycle of an object “from cradle to cradle,” about recycling and comfort, all these aspects are relevant in our work. If something (e.g. an office chair) is not comfortable, then it has no further relevance and this process we call ‘form finding’ and not ‘form giving’ – meaning, you first have to listen to the material you are working with, to its form, and then start the next cycle.26

26 Interview on June 6, 2014.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 59

Evolution as a Guiding Principle in Design The reduction to the very essence and the search for functional forms is more than only a defined aim of her work – it is the underlying philosophy. She cites the bonmot of a colleague who – as she points out – always claims that “revolution is overrated” and that evolution is the much more powerful concept. This principle best characterizes the countless steps of a development cycle – all the numerous trials and corrections deeply constitute this process. (cf. Fig. 19) She speaks in a focused and serious way and demonstrates how much reflection and control it takes until a product is ready for sale. The final product, she elaborates, has to work in all its dimensions and in every single detail.

Fig. 19: A final design product: detailed view of Setu Chair. 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller.

This principle is a defining feature of her work method, because ideas have to be tested for efficiency immediately and – due to the individual aim – they have to be realized through an appropriate medium. Carola Zwick leaves no doubt that to her mind there is no room for reveries or daydreams in a production cycle. Aesthetics in all aspects is what drives her. If one of her students comes up with some idea she will always recommend to them to instantly test it in practice. It is simply not enough to visualize ideas as images on screen or to test something in the second

60 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

dimension that later has to function in the third one. “This makes no sense at all,” she continues. Mistakes that are overlooked may produce terrible results not only in the production process but also for merchandizing and distribution. One has to consider the economic consequences to understand how closely this process has to be monitored and documented. Keeping track of all relevant steps and decisions can help to prevent situations like the ones portrayed in the movie “Groundhog Day,” she laughs, and of course it is important for teams working in cycles that they do not try to approach the same problem with the same strategy twice. (In the movie actor Bill Murray miraculously finds himself in a time loop repeating just one day again and again to experience a series of recurring events and their sometimes dramatic and sometimes funny consequences.)

Andreas Pinkow: Thinking and Drawing The founder and managing director of the agency Focus+Echo Andreas Pinkow stresses in the beginning of our conversation that his roots were in the arts. His hair is ash blond, he wears brown designer glasses and a sandy colored, crumpled suit completes a relaxed, dressed down look. On his left wrist he wears an elegant silver watch with a black face. It is a hot summer day and Pinkow has taken his bicycle to meet me at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. He instantly opens the windows, but there is no breeze as outside the air is hot and dry. STAGE DESIGNER

RUNS FOCUS & ECHO AGENCY

ATTRACTED BY THE POWER OF IMAGES

APPRECIATES AESTHETIC VALUE IN OBJECTS OF ALL KINDS EDUCATED ARTIST

He was educated as a painter in the “classical sense,” he expounds. Images of abstract art – for example American art (he does not name any specific artist) – left a deep impression on him. There were images in which for example a “dancing quality” of scripture (which makes me think of Cy Twombly’s work) produced a certain rhythm, so that the images showed nothing but themselves. This was what gave images their power – this very moment when foreground and background merged into each other and cleared away. He remembers such experiences as most moving. He puts his hands on the table and makes eye contact



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 61

without blinking an eye. From time to time he gazes out of the window, as if this makes it easier for him to think and concentrate.

Fig. 20: Andreas Pinkow: “Images are like music – good images produce an enjoyable sound.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

The powers of the image have attracted him until today. And even in his private sphere it has been very important for him to be surrounded by beautiful things, he adds. At home he only keeps things he experiences as “visually pleasant.” These might be pieces of furniture as well as tiny gadgets in his household, like for example a door handle. He considers an ugly door handle an eyesore, which has to be removed and replaced by a “proper one,” he clarifies and further explains how he repeatedly enjoys such a detail every time he sees or touches it. In this respect he sees himself as a “visual person,” he asserts. “It’s the same with music” that produces “an enjoyable sound.” For him, the process of feeling and understanding are firmly connected. This correlation has deeply influenced his work and has played an important role in his dealing with the orchestration of visual spaces and the mediation of knowledge.

62 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

The Art of Drawing as “Aimless Investigation” In the course of the conversation Pinkow repeatedly refers to projects he has implemented to illustrate his opinions. He considers himself autonomous in developing his ideas and claims to have more or less endless options to illustrate a certain theme. At the beginning of a project he approaches and confronts a problem intellectually. He develops certain topics from of abstract terms and then starts drawing “immediately.” He experiments with hand-drawn sketches as well as with “360° production methods” or sometimes he simply provides a frame in which others can show their pictures. The central question is whether one could find an appropriate image for the topic in question. To make this happen, one has to “think really hard,” he declares. The instruments to develop such a concept may deeply vary from time to time and situational wise and this is why he has no coherent visual language. His repertoire is bound to simply vary depending on theme and project. He reports how he created a huge stage for the EXPO 2010, called The Urban Planet Pavilion (cf. Fig. 21) in Shanghai.27 In the beginning of the project he was looking for an image to address “all these people” – many of them illiterate – an image that could actually be understood by the masses. Counting about 80,000 visitors a day he needed an image that “justified” this enormous effort and that would be appropriate in its dimensions. At some point he was reminded of the mission to the moon and of the radical disruption resulting from the fact that all of a sudden humanity was able to see the earth from outer space. Bearing in mind this revolutionary change in perspectives was a big step towards the solution. He decided to share this overwhelming experience with the visitors and put them in the position of astronauts floating around in space, gazing down at the planet. (...) this (idea) we realized with a gigantic pavilion, with a 40-meter-diameter-calvaria, 12 meters high, yes, and there we projected the image of the earth and the people looked at it from above and all of them had the same expression on their faces – they were astonished and they wanted to say ‘thank you’...28

In order to have a view of the surface of the globe from a height of 12 meters, the visitors had to climb a spiral staircase. This experience challenged their perspectives and changed their way of seeing and thus, he claims, he created the very nucleus from which he was able to continue the narration of the pavilion.

27 https://www.triad.de/en/projects/urban-planet-theme-pavilion. Accessed: February 3, 2016. 28 Interview on June 4, 2014.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 63

Drawing was a means of “aimless investigation” to him that again and again made it possible to find new forms and expressions and to test the efficiency of ideas. Drawings helped not only to develop an understanding of how things related to each other but also supplied an idea of the appropriate distance between objects and of developing realistic dimensions. It was “like constant checking or mental controlling,” he says, smiling, and there were times one would find a working solution and there were times one had to accept that it simply did not take a defined form.

Fig. 21: “A Journey around the World.” 2008. Original Sketch of the Urban Planet Pavilion, EXPO 2010. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow.

Marc Tamschick: unique copies for the now I came across Marc Tamschick’s work during a presentation he gave at the Archaeological Landesmuseum in Brandenburg. He is a committed expert of exhibition and stage design and a skillful producer of interactive media architecture. At around lunchtime, I meet the creative director of the agency TAMSCHICK MEDIA+SPACE in his office located in a commercial park in Schöneberg, Berlin. The spacious floor on which the agency resides almost appears deserted and Tamschick explains that most of his colleagues go out for lunch at this time of day. He himself writes a food order on a piece of paper (“you want something?”) and hands it to a colleague. Then he takes a seat behind a long elongated black desk that fills almost half of the room.

64 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Creative Collaboration It is a sunny, beautiful day at the end of May and a hint of early summer is already in the air. Tamschick wears a light blue, half-open shirt and black designer glasses and explains that when he was a student at a film academy, he could not watch movies “all the time,” because they mentally paralyzed him and kept him from developing his own ideas. Later, after he had finished school, he “watched all that stuff again,” but then without feeling obliged to analyze all the details. PRODUCES STAGE AND EXHIBITION DESIGNS

DEVELOPING VISUAL ARGUMENTS IS LIKE “GARDENING” “IMAGE JUNKIE”

RUNS TAMSCHICK MEDIA+SPACE AGENCY

EDUCATED FILM MAKER

Fig. 22: Marc Tamschick: “Developing design is like an endless organic process.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 65

Images to him are a means of expression and working material which he deliberately uses disregarding conventions or restrictions. He calls himself an “image junkie” deeply impressed by the potentials of the visual and deeply respects the formative and patronizing, the inscribing power that is connected to images. At the same time there is nothing, he asserts, that he and his colleagues do not do with and to images. He characterizes the working process in his team as the fruitful interplay of various perspectives and competencies. Yes, I believe only a human being is capable of this, a human being together with other human beings can do this much better than all alone, I believe. That is because you come to an idea through a dialogue or say, a discourse, or throughout a dispute. Differing opinions cause frictions and it is like in physics... thereby something comes into life that is exciting.29

For him it is important to work together with people who are not “spoiled” by working for radio or television channels. Like Carola Zwick he describes the design process as a constant advancement, as a continuing organic process without any defined end. It is necessary to keep an eye on ideas that “grow and sprout,” he says, applying terms from gardening. The creative process is strongly dependent on aspects related to content, design or technical issues and none of these elements will ever really be completed – therefore “there is no such thing as a state of happiness” he thoughtfully adds.

Exploring the Unknown A characteristic of his work was that he “was lucky enough” to “create unique copies” in every new project. These products that “did not exist before and have a clearly defined life span” thus are very exciting in design terms because “every time you have to explore something new.” In this process the danger of failure is always potentially inherent. “There is something artistic to this highly individualized process that focuses on a particular problem,” he explains. Essentially, the aim is to always come up with an individual interpretation for a certain problem or task. “If you don’t find that personal approach, it will simply be impossible to fulfill the task.” One has to be able to identify with a certain product and only then it is possible to complete a project. Such cases, he adds (as if he does not want to leave a wrong impression), are “very, very rare.” He talks about a current project for which “a producer of detergents” has asked his support and assistance (He does not share any further detail, as he

29 Interview on June 17, 2014.

66 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

seemingly does not intend to reveal company secrets.30). He initially has rejected that request because he could not see himself working for a company that produces detergents. Only after extensive and intensive talks and deliberations he was convinced of the contrary. “Sometimes things like this happen,” he says. But the basic truth is that there is no alternative to radically think from one’s own perspective. Only if it is possible to connect a certain subject to own experiences it is possible to get access and only then this can lead to a productive process, he claims. There is absolutely no chance of producing a solution by imitating or adopting a customer’s perspective or by adapting to their preferences. He maintains that if one tries to approach a project like this it is doomed to failure.

Anouk Hoffmeister: INDIVIDUAL HANDWRITING

Fig. 23: Anouk Hoffmeister: “Communicating with images is more efficient than communicating with words alone.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

30 In the meanwhile project details are available on the website of the agency: http://www. tamschick.com/en/projects/experience-room. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 67

Reconsidering the Workplace I meet Anouk Hoffmeister at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. She gets herself a cup of coffee from the kitchen before we start the interview. Anouk (we are on a first name basis) works as an Interaction Designer at the laboratory where she is a member of a project that focuses on the observation of interdisciplinary collaborations. She is planning to write a doctoral thesis, but explains that this is not a “natural thing” or even common practice for a designer. Only a few universities offer this opportunity and that is why she has decided to join the project. For her doctoral thesis Anouk is planning to “better connect physical and digital representations of tools and elements relevant for the work place. She conceives digital objects not as images, but portrays them “in their relationship and in their meaning.” This represents not only a challenge in form but also in content. Basically, she deals with nothing less than the “work place of the future.” Anouk wears a royal blue blouse with white patterns (flying pairs of ducks) and a thin bracelet with a golden four-leaf clover pendant. Near the wall there is a white chair with a backrest over which Anouk has put her jacket. During our conversation she sits silently and erect, as if her shoulders are magically fixed at some invisible spot. Although she puts a lot of emphasis in her words, her facial expression conveys almost no emotion. RESEARCH FELLOW AT INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

ENGAGED IN RESEARCH PROJECT: EXPERIMENT AND OBSERVATION

COLLECTS VISUAL IMPRESSIONS EXPLORES RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICAL AND VIRTUAL TOOLS

STUDIED INTERACTION DESIGN

Visual Language As a designer she has a well-developed feeling for whether an object or an image is consistent or not. Images, she explains, embody her daily working materials so that when she is walking around in the streets she keeps her eyes always wide open to catch new impressions and inspirations. On one of her last flights for example she took photos of color flows that appeared to be rather kitschy and did not come out well, but she can exploit such impressions in her work. At the same time she does not consider herself a collector like the main character in Jonathan-Safran-Foer’s novel “Everything is Illuminated” who collects all kinds

68 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

of every-day objects. She puts impressions or images that she really cherishes on her office walls for some time. Such things are not necessarily of any aesthetic value but they represent some detail or relevant idea. Of course, she affirms, that once it comes to product presentations, she has to put much emphasis on the quality of visual representations. They have to be “exciting” or “moving shots” and she never employs pre-assembled charts, but only charts she has produced herself. The image, she argues, is relevant “at any rate.” In order to illustrate her individual work with images, she shows me her notebook in which she experiments with all kinds of drawings, sketches, scribbles and ideas. She frequently uses the book for communication with colleagues in order to prevent misunderstandings. “You can try and explain a lot with language,” she says, “but if you support and supplement your communication with a drawing, things are getting much easier.” On an abstract level, her work is mostly about finding the right form for the right content and therefore it is easier to let images speak when she presents something. Nothing is more boring than someone presenting “a text standing before a text,” she explains, obviously thinking of a presentation of text slides. If someone wants to attract the attention of an audience, it is much better to just show the images and narrate freely. If one tries to read and listen at the same time this would only produce “spaghetti in the head” and utter confusion, Anouk comments, without smiling. But “odd results” just like this can be witnessed everywhere. Speakers torment their audiences with endless citations or hold their presentations in English and expect everybody to still be able to follow. For her it is extremely important to use visual language consciously. Using visual language in a professional way, she emphasizes, means applying an individual “hand writing.”

Summary From the first encounter with informants from the design sector a number of themes can be distinguished that characterize a design approach. In their work designers are concerned with finding a working solution for a certain problem and this solution has to be appropriate. Though the terms on which something can be regarded as appropriate remain blurry (because such terms are dependent on the context), their work practice is explicitly target oriented and many of the informants seem to have a specific audience in mind when reflecting on the products they produce. Rather than follow well-defined steps in order to achieve their goals, the design process seems to be characterized by a highly individualized approach that involves a certain amount of intuition and pays much attention to aesthetic qualities as well as aspects of perception.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 69

4.1.2 Biology For the field of biology I chose two informants from the Museum of Natural History, Berlin, and three informants that were working for or were associated with the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. I first met entomologist Hannelore Hoch when she held a “Lunch Talk” at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory, and later she agreed to participate in the interview project and I visited her at her workplace in the museum. There I came across another participant, Gregor Hagedorn, who is responsible for the “Digital Worlds” department. Regine Hengge also held a “Lunch Talk” presentation at the laboratory and is an associated member of the project, while Carola Becker and Friederike Saxe work as research fellows at the laboratory.

Gregor Hagedorn: SYSTEMATIC DESCRIPTIONS Gregor Hagedorn, head of the “Digital Worlds” department at the Museum of Natural History Berlin smiles friendly when meeting me at the staff entrance. It took him quite a while to walk down the maze of floors to the reception area, he remarks. On our way down the endless floors he mentions that he has just recently moved to a freshly renovated part of the building. On the walls old prints with botanic motifs are displayed and here and there some fossil preserved in slate are on display. Walking past these huge cabinets filled with natural history exhibits and drawings from various periods of time and down endless corridors and stairways, the nonlocal visitor must necessarily lose orientation. From Gregor Hagedorn’s office one can look down at an opaque dome on top of the main building of the museum – a hall in which a number of gigantic dinosaur skeletons are exhibited. His office is crammed with cardboard containers, the shelves more or less empty. A huge display is placed next to a wall, I notice a computer and an additional monitor, a bowl filled with jelly beans, the package of a printer cartridge in the trash bin, a circle of brown upholstered chairs are positioned in the center of the room. HEAD OF DIGITAL WORLDS DEPARTMENT

WORKS WITH DATA IMAGES APPRECIATES DRAWINGS

BIOLOGIST

MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, BERLIN

70 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Gregor Hagedorn claims that he does not have much to say about the use of images. Despite this spontaneous judgment, it soon becomes clear how diverse, manifold and clear-cut his professional occupation with images and imaging techniques is. He remembers that back in his student days he was very much impressed by drawings that were used for the documentation of organismic structures. Back then he came to understand “why one draws and why drawing for the purpose of observation is a significant way of understanding.”

Fig. 24: Gregor Hagedorn: “It is most important to check whether images represent data correctly.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

Especially concerning fungi – you put them on a slide under the microscope and squeeze them under the cover glass. But they are too small to get the right depth of focus you would need (for a photograph). And you cannot get a proper understanding of how the structures relate to each other without focusing up or down.31

31 Interview on May 6, 2014.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 71

From his perspective a proper understanding of organismic structures is largely dependent on the accuracy of the observation. “You have to do it rather systematically,” he goes on and we would never have obtained the current state of morphologic research, or of our morphologic understanding of the animal kingdom and plant world, without people trying for generations to capture this with ink on paper.

But even in his current field of interest exact visual control is of great significance, Hagedorn explains. When it comes to the visualization of data it is important to check results carefully. If one failed to do so and simply send the data through a standard data processor – results would definitely “be questionable” in scientific terms.

Carola Becker: guiding the view Carola Becker, who is mainly concerned with aspects of morphology, is very much aware of an inherent agency in images. I meet the researcher for an appointment in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory one April morning. We rather incidentally run into each other outside the building while the wind is blowing and the weather seems to change every 10 minutes. We climb the stairs together up to the second floor. The meeting room where we are going to have our conversation is scattered with chairs – obviously used in an earlier project group meeting. We get ourselves some coffee in the kitchen and start talking. Carola wears a green pullover and a colorful scarf around her neck, but seems a little irritated and uneasy when I tell her about my plan to videotape the interview. Only after a moment of hesitation she laughs and agrees. My data are images … whatever technique I apply as a morphologist in the end an image will be the result. No numbers, no graphs, but first of all images, that show organismic structures. Images of histological structures influenced me a lot, because they are colorful and very sophisticated images, which on the one hand reveal structures and organization on a microscopic level and on the other look very beautiful – and of course images of crabs are special for me, because they show ‘my organisms’.32

According to Carola Becker using images renders it possible to clearly demonstrate and explain all kinds of aspects, which hardly can be described with words only. The effects of the visual, the special capacity and brilliance of images play a core role in her work.

32 Interview on April 15, 2014.

72 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 25: Carola Becker: “Beautiful images are a strong currency in the academic world.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

MORPHOLOGIST

APPRECIATES BEAUTIFUL IMAGES “AN AGENCY IS INHERENT IN IMAGES”

BIOLOGIST

CRAB EXPERT

She uses images as aesthetic stylistic devices and seems to be very aware of the process of editing. The beauty of histologic structures pleases her. She explains that she once produced an image of the ovaries of a pea crab. (cf. Fig. 26) Normally she prepares sets of dyed tissue, which later on were photographed. The resulting image with its orange and green colors was very beautiful and clearly readable. These qualities play a prominent role in her field of work whenever it comes to publication or presentation. She remembers a talk she once gave in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory in which she presented charts with a wide variety of crabs and crayfish that attracted attention because of their beauty, their colorful



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 73

appearance and visual opulence. People from the audience voiced all kinds of associations and a broad spectrum of ideas, obviously triggered by the richness in form and color. It was all about attention, she comments, laughing. Beautifully manipulated images, she adds (she uses the term “beautiful” many times in the course of our conversation), play a key role in her scientific work.

Fig. 26: Histological section: Ovaries of a pea crab. Carola Becker, 2005.

Regine Hengge: A SCHOOL OF SEEING In the beginning of our conversation, which takes place at her research institute located in central Berlin, microbiologist Regine Hengge mentions her coming from a family of artists. Her father used to be a graphic designer and head of a gallery for contemporary art while her mother was as a fashion designer. In this family environment she learned how to deal with images, she adds. At home the “Petersburg Hanging” was standard and she was surrounded by artistic images. Such images were frequently exchanged, because her parents had many artist friends – “new images came in and we were simply exposed to images from the very moment we were born, my siblings and I,” she remembers.

74 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 27: Regine Hengge: “Being exposed to art is constant visual training.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

MICROBIOLOGIST

WAS RAISED IN A FAMILY OF ARTISTS “BEAUTIFICATION IS LEGITIMATE FOR ADVERTISEMENT IMAGES”

“SEEING CAN BE TRAINED”

WORKS WITH VISUAL DATA AS WELL AS MODEL IMAGES DERIVED FROM DATA

Her parents taught her to look closely and to describe what she saw in detail. This is why she considers herself a very “visual person” and points out that at present she benefits significantly workwise from these skills. In science, dealing with images has become more and more important over recent years. Hengge wears a thin black long sleeved turtleneck sweater with a solid necklace made from irregularly shaped pieces of turquoise, a broad silver ring on her left middle finger and dark horn-rimmed glasses that stand in stark contrast to her long



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 75

blond curly hair. On her desk mountains of papers are piled up – a single dark stone next to them. Behind her office chair a high shelf reaches up to the ceiling. She speaks in a fast and enunciated manner and aims directly at the heart of the issues. She puts emphasis in her words as if she wants to express “Okay, this is it – there is nothing more to say! Let’s go on.” The building in which Regine Hengge works is a faceless block with long rows of tinted windows, a left and forgotten container-type structure that reminds somehow of a school building, or a kindergarten. The long stairways inside the functional building are illuminated by neon lights, the doors of the laboratory spaces are wide open and every now and then somebody in functional clothing walks out, nodding friendly, but mostly busy and not really being attentive. Everything appears sterile and there is a smell of germicide in the air. Inside the building it is warm and everything is reminiscent of a hospital. Hannelore Hoch: THE SMELL OF INK Hannelore Hoch, a biologist at the Museum of Natural History in Berlin, greets me with a friendly smile when meeting me at the staff entrance. She apologizes for

Fig. 28: Hannelore Hoch: “People who use drawings have many more words for the things they observe.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

76 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

the delay caused by elevator problems. Then she guides me through the winding corridors – we walk along the exhibition, walk past the yellow-shimmering wet preparations collection through a mountain of high-piled steel cabinets in which – as Hoch explains – the postcranial mammals are stored. We stop there for a minute and she describes how cranium, skeleton and fur are kept separately while I try to imagine the grotesque conglomerate inside these cabinets. The cranium, she explains, is most important for scientific purposes and therefore is stored separately. Continuing our walk she tells me how one of her colleagues spent most of her working life as a researcher reassembling skulls and related furs of countless creatures (which were obviously stored separately and thus got mixed up). Before we reach her sun-flooded office we joke around a little bit of how much easier it is to generate chaos than to create order. Hannelore Hoch offers me a seat near a small coffee table right behind the door. A stack of paper is the silent witness of her scholarly activities. The table is covered with a black cloth showing green embroideries in the form of tropical leaves. A broad decal on the inside of her door says: “Give peace a chance.” While talking she frequently laughs and gives colorful examples that illustrate her points.

“The Inspired” An image she once saw and has kept in mind ever since and which still is her favorite is “The Inspired” by French painter Marc Chagall. The picture shows an artist looking passionately at a bouquet of flowers that he has just painted and he “smiles at this bouquet with an expression of absolutely rapt enthusiasm about his work of art.” She has been able to “get in contact with this human being,” because he is so devoted to one exclusive thing – not because he achieved something special, but because he is showing this “enthusiasm.” She quite often finds herself in similar situations. It makes a big difference if one looks at something, thinking, “this is what I did,” or “Oh, my God, this is beautiful!” When she starts speaking about the little organisms she studies, some of her enthusiasm instantly becomes visible. The cicadas she studies are hardly a centimeter in length, but – she points out – there are endless things to discover and big mysteries to be solved. The insects originated from South East Asia and the rainforests were their habitat. They had a most complex sensory organ, which has not yet been fully explored with respect to its formation and function. This is a small beaker and around it on the edge, there are wax glands. In any case, we reconstructed this with greatest finesse and there are glands located around here, they



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 77

excrete wax. It is a very orderly structure and hollow at the inside. It is possible to lift that up carefully with a needle and then this structure can be found below. There are two filamentous sensory hairs and around them tiny sensory cones and I assume that if these sensory hairs are moved by wind or vibration or whatever, then they touch parts of the sensory cones and thereby extract some sort of information.33

An old fashioned technique Approaching such structures and understanding their presumed functions requires intense observations and therefore it is still “the good old-fashioned drawing technique” that serves as a standard procedure in her field. About 80 percent of the images that describe such organismic structures are sketches and she still expresses herself in this “notation” – although this is not very popular with her students, she points out with a hint of regret in her voice. When drawing, many things become clear, she goes on, and drawing is an enlightening process in itself, which cannot easily be replaced by any other technique. Because of an overlap in contrast, photographs often do not allow the interpretation of structures and even three-dimensional visualizations sometimes do not clearly show where a structure originates and where it exactly ends, or how the overlap of structures is situated. ENTOMOLOGY

USES DRAWINGS AS AN OBSERVATIONAL TECHNIQUE “ONLY DRAWING TEACHES SEEING”

ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT HER WORK

LOVES WORKING WITH PEN AND INK

Thus drawing still is the prevailing medium, despite its difficult handling. At the same time it is unavoidable to let others evaluate what is made visible in a drawing. It is an advantage for her that her husband is an entomologist as well – so she can ask his opinion every now and then to learn whether he sees eye to eye with her. A good scientific image in her eyes is an image that shows how something is truly understood. Therefore it can contribute to the formation of new hypotheses. Drawing, she meaningfully says, will lead to better descriptions

33 Interview on April 22, 2014.

78 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

and a clearer understanding. So what is more, someone who is able to draw has a much more sophisticated vocabulary for the things observed. Well, I see this with people that look closely – interestingly, they have a complete different vocabulary, because if someone draws a lot and looks a lot, then he knows – let’s say – ten different words for a ‘dome-shaped hill’. To someone who doesn’t look that closely, it is only ‘some grind’.

Fig. 29: Hannelore Hoch at work with the camera lucida. Photograph Dr. Manfred Asche, 2014.

She uses the “Camera lucida” for the purpose of detailed scientific drawings. (cf. Fig. 29) This is an old and largely forgotten technique that allows seeing both scene and drawing surface simultaneously akin to a photographic double exposure in real time. It takes about 3 – 4 nights (she normally does her drawings at home after work) and about ten sketches to describe an organism in detail. Working with paper and pencil or ink simply pleases her. “I love the smell of ink” she says with a winning smile and adds, “I rather correct with a knife than with a computer mouse.” The camera lucida is a helpful tool for the drawing of scientific illustrations. A prisma (for example in the form of a mirror) is attached to a microscope or binoculars and allows the



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 79

scientists to virtually see the tip of the pencil together with the image of the object, Hannelore Hoch explains. This enables her to trace the contours of the object. The resulting sketch that is thereby generated (the scholar normally does not look at the drawing while looking through the microscope) is afterwards reworked, using ink or immediately scanned and edited digitally. Working with a Camera lucida is rather demanding insofar as it requires patience and training. Apart from a photo it produces an abstraction of the observation, thus at the same time revealing both the strengths and the weaknesses of this method: it can only represent structures correctly, which are understood correctly. (Short version of how H. Hoch describes the method).

Friederike Saxe: IMAGES MUST SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES Friederike and I have arranged a meeting right after the weekly “Lunch Talk” in the laboratory, a time that is popular for meetings among researchers because many of the associated members then get together. Friederike Saxe is a biologist working for a base project at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory that is devoted to aspects of structural research. She and her colleagues analyze historical,

Fig. 30: Friederike Saxe: “Scientists need to pay close attention to how images are produced!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

80 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

illustrated zoological literature in order to extract valuable information that at the time of “their discovery were regarded as just observations.”34 Almost all participants regard this as a chance to meet and discuss things. After the “Lunch Talk” members of the laboratory gather in small groups and engage in conversations. Most of the tables are covered with empty plates, cutlery, glasses and decanters, half full of water. Near the entrance door of the laboratory there are the leftovers from lunch – salad and pastry on silver platters. Leftover food is usually stored in the refrigerator in the kitchen to be eaten up over the next couple of days. It is a bright day in April with clouds and birds singing, everybody seems to be in a good mood. Friederike appears to be a very focused conversational partner. She speaks slowly and it seems as if she has gone over her answers carefully in her mind before sharing her thoughts. Images in publications have to “speak for themselves,” she points out. In her field it is the combination of written abstracts and associated images that helps researchers to quickly get an impression of what a certain research paper is all about. The aesthetic effect images have may not play a crucial role. BIOLOGIST

SCIENTISTS NEED TRAINING FOR WORKING WITH IMAGES WORK WITH IMAGES BECOMES MORE AND MORE IMPORTANT IN HER FIELD

EXTRACTS INFORMATION FROM HISTORICAL ZOOLOGICAL LITERATURE

MEMBER OF INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

She pauses for a moment. This reminds her of a presentation she gave in one of the first “Lunch Talks” in the laboratory. On this occasion she presented a chart to which she had added colors in order to facilitate understanding and focusing attention. Colleagues in the audience discussed this manipulation controversially and the question was raised whether such a “liberal” way of dealing with images was ethically responsible or should be considered inappropriate. She sighs, but from how she is talking about this experience it remains unclear whether she is

34 https://www.interdisciplinary-laboratory.hu-berlin.de/en/base-projects/historical-structuralinvestigations-laboratory. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 81

amused or irritated by this controversy. She seems to be fully aware of this and adds that she can very well understand why some people criticized how she dealt with colors in the image she used in the presentation, but to her mind the “real mistake” was to choose “this visualization for this audience,” without indicating all steps of image manipulation she had applied. Back then she did not pay enough attention to such aspects, she recalls laughingly. Friederike carries a black key chain around her neck to which an electronic card is attached which serves as a key for the main doors of the building. She speaks very openly about her work with images and goes much into detail, but at certain moments it appears as if she is in doubt as to whether approaching the work with images on a theoretical level really makes much sense. Looking out the window a yellow brick stone chimney reminds of a long forgotten past. At the end of our meeting Friederike shows a lot of interest in the subject of image manipulation in general. She recommends talking to a microbiologist, because she supposes that in this field of research the topic is even more relevant. Before we say goodbye she asks me to show her my results before publication – because sometimes it may be necessary to work things over again – even if a publication correctly reflects what was said in an interview readjustments may be advisable in her opinion.

Summary Scholars from the field of biology identify images as data or representations that reflect the outcome of scientific observations. Although an aesthetic quality is considered helpful for attracting attention and for producing clearly readable images, the main significance of images is to show something that the researcher has discovered under the microscope or through whatever visualization technique. Curiosity, enthusiasm and a great deal of devotion to detail and accuracy characterize their approach most adequately.

4.1.3 Art History Compared with the field of design and biology the selection of informants from the field of art history is less consistent. Though I found informants from the Interdisciplinary Laboratory, I decided to include museum curators that professionally deal with art in exhibitions rather than art historians working in or for a museum. This partly results from the fact that due to my former professional background as an employee of a museum I still have connections to curators who I considered to be promising interview participants. The three curators that

82 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

I included in this section not only have profound practical knowledge of working with art in exhibitions of cultural history or photography but also partly have a background in art history.

Angela Boesl: RESPECT FOR THE ORIGINAL Angela Boesl who works as an art historian at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory enters the meeting room we have agreed to meet in and she initially starts chatting about her doctoral thesis. It is a bright April day with an intense blue sky resembling a picture-perfect idyll. The air smells of spring but pulled-down blinds darken the room. Angela has a winning smile and she talks with much emphasis in her voice and tends to describe things in much detail, as if she wants to make sure that she is fully understood. From time to time she touches her throat or crosses her arms. Before we start the conversation, she gets herself a big glass of water from the kitchen.

Fig. 31: Angela Boesl: “Every creation is unique in its way.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 83

The Magic of Hand Drawings Personally she is deeply impressed by hand drawings and graphic reproductions, she reflects. It was “incredibly awesome” to see how a composition is developed from lines and she adds that especially hand drawings make an intimate encounter with the artist possible – with “what went from an artist’s mind to an artist’s hand right onto the paper.” Dürer was the “ultimate master” in this respect – but this was of course “relative” – when there were lots of other artists and painters who were able to skillfully express themselves through media such as coal, chalk or paint. From hand drawings she gets the most intuitive impression of how an image is produced. She herself would like to frequently draw, but in a rather rough and documentary fashion, using sketches as a tool for a better understanding of the details of a composition. Even before she began her studies she was attracted to medieval panel paintings and she enjoyed “following the stories” that were told in them. She never really liked oversized paintings (“Grosse Schinken”), Angela laughs. But for example works of Delaunay and particularly his Orphism were definitely among her early favorites. The dynamics she found in these pictures deeply moved her. Angela sits slightly bend forward, hands on the tabletop and her body unconsciously moved back and forth. STUDIED ART HISTORY

VALUES HAND DRAWINGS

DECIPHERING ART IS A WAY OF MEETING THE ARTIST WORKS AT INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

Her attitude towards images is characterized by a deep respect for “the original.” Sometimes, she reports, she is disappointed with museums because “they do not sell reproductions of her favorite paintings as postcards.” Then she often tried to find comfort in the thought that this is actually appropriate and justifiable, because every “creation is unique in its way.” Obviously, something is lost in the reproduction of an original – a loss of visual information or maybe a loss of authenticity. In her discipline the aim is to analyze images step by step, in order to decipher them gradually – “even if this process never will never be completed and even if some aspects will always remain mysterious in an image.”

84 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Bodo Baumunk: AN ILLUSTRATED WORLD HISTORY The restaurant Cum Laude in which I meet curator Bodo Baumunk is located on the campus of Humboldt University Berlin. I am a few minutes early and thus start looking for a nice table for the interview. A few minutes later Bodo Baumunk enters and waves a silent “hello” across the room. We sit down and he orders a piece of cake with coffee and leans back as far as possible. Baumunk has dark, curly hair and a high forehead. He wears glasses, a golden necklace and a dark suit, complemented by a vest in red ochre, which makes him look a little dandyish. I know Baumunk from work at the Jewish Museum where he set up the exhibition “Kosher and Co.” as a guest curator. Baumunk loves to play with words and to create complex sentences. “When I was a boy,” he reports with a subtle smile around his mouth, “in this household (referring to, his parents’ house) in which there was a shortage of books,” he used to study Veit Valentin’s “Illustrated World History.”

Fig. 32: Bodo Baumunk: “Images are a result of human creative expression – they are intentionally shaped.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

The pictures he found in these volumes attracted him and opened his eyes to the world. These images were not only “icons,” but also a wide variety of cultural



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 85

impressions from countries all over the world left a long lasting impression on him. There, the proclamation “of the emperor” was printed right next to the “Battle of Gettysburg.” AS A BOY STUDIED VEIT VALENTIN’S ILLUSTRATED WORLD HISTORY

CREATES EXHIBITIONS DEVOTED TO NATURAL HISTORY AND THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE IMAGES ARE INTENTIONALLY SHAPED ENTITIES

EXHIBITION CURATOR

SEES ARTISTIC CONTRIBUTIONS TO SCIENCE EXHIBITIONS CRITICALLY

Art and Science In his work he is frequently confronted with images of another kind – because he mostly creates exhibitions dedicated to subjects of “natural history or the history of science.” Performing artists who are convinced they are able to approach “medical visualization techniques from a subjective standpoint” have never “counted as relevant” in his view. He would keep them away from “his” exhibitions “like Archangel Gabriel with the sword of flames,” he explains in a somber voice, because he cannot see any advantage in mingling art with science. After all, he continues, he has never learned anything from artists about science, whereas he has learned many things about art “from the scientists’ writings.” He has come to terms with “this popular tendency” to assume that artists have an expert knowledge in the field of science, but considers the idea that images can explain the world (Orig. “ein Weltdeutungsvermögen haben”) as an idea that “contradicts enlightenment.” He dips his spoon into the coffee cup while looking up to the ceiling, keeping his right arm behind his neck, gently smiling.

Horst Bredekamp: OBSERVATION AND LANGUAGE It is a beautiful April morning with cloudless skies and cheerful people in the streets when I am heading for an interview with Horst Bredekamp, a prolific

86 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

scholar and speaker of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Bredekamp has invited me to his home, since, as he puts it, there it is possible “to talk quietly and undisturbedly.” When I ring the bell, I am immediately buzzed in, as if he has waited for me right behind the door. I am invited into a beautiful old building with shiny floors and an intense odor in the air that smells like floor polish. The walls are all painted the color of green marble and covered with beautiful ornaments in the style of the turn of the century. Bredekamp seems busy when he opens the door. He offers juice as refreshment, which I promptly accept. We sit down at a small table next to the door. A huge desk is located close to the window, covered with paper and other materials and there is a monitor on a tripod right next to it. Everything appears to be functional and well thought through. Looking at the walls I notice an armada of books that seems to reach up to the ceiling. He reports an anecdote from his childhood: when he was about 8 or 10 years of age his parents took him to a film matinee,

Fig. 33: Horst Bredekamp: “Images drive people to action!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 87

“this movie about Picasso from around 1957,” he recalls. His parents were members of the film club in Kiel and when watching the movie he was deeply impressed by the scene, in which Picasso created and painted over forms and images – “from handlebars to bullhorns and faces” – performing all this behind a gigantic glass wall. The artist expressed “the latency of form in its permanent changeability in a most surprising manner” and at that very moment the idea of him becoming an art historian took shape (Orig. “von diesem Moment an war ich Kunsthistoriker”), Bredekamp says, laughing. HEAD OF INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

PROLIFIC WRITER

FASCINATED BY HOW IMAGES DRIVE PEOPLE TO ACTION DECORATED ART HISTORIAN

ENTHUSIASTIC SOCCER PLAYER

While speaking, Bredekamp seems highly focused on the choice of his words, the grammatical structure of his sentences and the effect his words have. When asked about theoretical or practical aspects of image work, he retorts as if he has answered such questions many times before and he emphasizes his statements, as if there is no other possible way of interpretation or opinion. Something is an “absolute condition,” or of “utmost importance,” there are “unbeatable working instruments” of the “highest precision,” or problems have to be reduced to “strict phenomenology.” His language is condensed, focused and accentuated; his words convey the power of judgment and the clear aim to convince. By structuring his conclusions in sections and by using enumerations like “first… second… third…” his words are persuasive and exude expert knowledge and reflect the analytical view of the art historian. From time to time he removes his glasses, then puts them on again. He speaks uniformly with short breaks between his words and corrects himself every now and then, as if he is dictating a text or if he intends to highlight the statements he wants to emphasize. He has a certain restless energy in his voice, as if there is some kind of underlying resistance he wants to overcome. In contrast to his focused and condensed way of speaking, he shows a tendency to comment his own statements – as if he is the presenter and the audience at the same time and thereby sometimes produces humoristic effects (“These were two brilliant answers.”). He starts his narration in a serious tone and without visible emotions – then lowering tension for a moment by adding a joke, only

88 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

to focus on the next moment again. When I ask him to comment on a scientific image that I have brought along, he spontaneously demonstrates how effectively he uses language in order to express observations: What I firstly like about this image is the deepness of the structure and that the morphologic quality of these tubes and fibers – it could be a germ as well – remains visible. Secondly, the highlighting is accentuated in a way so that the features and habits of this organism, I call it an ‘organism’, are clearly recognizable and that thirdly the manipulation of the organism through colors remains clearly visible.35

Theresia Ziehe: the mysteries in images

Fig. 34: Theresia Ziehe: “What characterizes images is their openness. One should better not explain them ad nauseam.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

Curator Theresia Ziehe works as head of the photography collection at the Jewish Museum Berlin. I meet her on a chilly evening in early May in a coffee house in 35 Interview on April 23, 2014.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 89

Kreuzberg. The large, but dimly lit room is crowded with people, their voices and the sound of clattering dishes fills the air. Initiating the conversation Theresia explains her father was an artist, who had a deep aversion to photography, because he thought it distorted the present moment. Her father’s attitude deeply influenced her and from him she learned that there always remains a mystery about images. Because of her father’s hostile attitude towards photography she used to be surrounded by sculptures, drawings and paintings in her childhood. After all, Theresia explains, she had great sympathy for this approach to not “analyze things to death.” The “openness” of the image is important to her, but of course the interpretation of images has to be considered carefully and be decided on a case-by-case basis. At her workplace she naturally deals with images all the time, “that is what it is all about,” she laughs. She can think of two categories of images in her work – creative images and documentary images. She pauses for a moment and looks at me, then smiles, saying that this only is a “first inspiration” – and that of course it is not possible to maintain such rigid categories. Something documentary can at the same time be creative and vice versa. FATHER WAS ARTIST

VALUES THE OPENNESS OF IMAGES THERE ARE DIMENSIONS IN IMAGES THAT CANNOT BE EXPLAINED

CURATOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY

PRAGMATIC ASPECTS INFLUENCE EXHIBITION MAKING PROCESS

First Impressions She finds it particularly interesting how different images are perceived depending on the way they are presented. In the museum, she often experiences that copies of photographs in poor quality were considered less significant than copies in better quality. Such effects influence whether an image or artifact is considered significant for the collection or not, even if one stresses the relevance of the photo before presenting it. Thus, visual effects or patterns of perception can significantly influence what is purchased for the collections, or it may also influence what is displayed in an exhibition. It is amazing that even experienced “image professionals” in a museum are easily misled by “first impressions” or the visual quality of a representation.

90 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Summary Art historians show a deep respect for images – a form of respect that takes into account aspects well beyond the artistic or information value that can be found in images. For some scholars it is the manifestation of the artistic expression (Boesl) and the potential of images to trigger emotions, for others it is the “latency of form in its permanent changeability” that best defines a specific agency inherent in images. Most of them are well aware of the aesthetic qualities in images and actively use language in order to describe, to analyze or interpret images. The overall aim is to understand images in as many of their dimensions as possible. At the same time art historians assume that there is always a limit to this understanding and that a hidden potential remains, something that cannot be expressed through words alone. It is the art historian’s ambition to reach out and capture some of these potentials in order to gradually deepen the understanding of images.

4.1.4 Computer Sciences Similar to informants from art history informants that work for computer museums do not necessarily have a background in computer studies. Museum curator Andreas Lange has an education in religious studies and Jürgen Feige is a philosopher, but both have practical experience in working for computer museums. I meet Andreas Lange in the museum of computer games in the district Mitte, Berlin. Jürgen Feige runs a computer museum at the University of Applied Arts and Sciences. Alexander Struck and Christian Stein, two informants that have an educational background in computer studies from the Interdisciplinary Laboratory also participate in the interview.

Christian Stein: SHAVED WITH OCCAM’S RAZOR When I meet computer scientist Christian Stein in one of the meeting rooms at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on a cloudy Thursday morning in late April he starts chatting about a recent vacation he spent in some cabin in the woods. From time to time he likes to escape the “permanent state of availability,” he explains. After having arrived in the woods it takes him only a couple of days to calm down, completely, relax and unwind. He always spends his time reading and writing, or hiking in the forests. In the house there is only a wood-burning stove and the rest of the interior is quite Spartan, too. After about two weeks he normally calls it a day, because then he has, as he puts it, “recharged (his) batteries.”



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 91

Fig. 35: Christian Stein: “Images mediate between object and viewer.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

RESEARCHER AT INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

IMAGES ARE SIGNS THAT CONVEY INFORMATION IMAGES HAVE TO SERVE A CLEAR PURPOSE

STUDIED COMPUTER SCIENCE AND GERMAN LITERATURE

VALUES DYNAMIC DIAGRAMS IN PRESENTATIONS

Christian appears to be very alert and interested in what our interview is all about. He puts his hands on the table while talking. Every now and then he underscores his words by moving his hands, only to put them back on the table immediately. The way he holds his hands appears as if he wants to focus on the center of his body (reminding me of a Sphinx). He gazes at the table or looks at me when talking, his voice strictly controlled. When talking he makes hardly any grammatical mistakes as if he is preparing a manuscript in his mind.

92 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Christian sees images in the tradition of Saussure as “signs” that ideally convey as much information as possible. When he was younger he was fascinated by geometry because it allows visualizing mathematical relations in spatial dimensions. At about the age of 15 he started to experiment with Photoshop and was thrilled by the sheer endless options the program offered, though the pictures that came out of these experiments were rather kitschy. From a more practical perspective images served him mostly as a means of thinking “through the hand” and helped him to make things clearer. At present images play a role in his work insofar as he uses them to develop concepts, visualize abstract ideas, and employ them in presentations. Here, it is most important that diagrams have a dynamic character: “A diagram has to build itself up step by step.” When I meet Christian for the interview he wears a red sports jacket with a T-shirt with the imprint “Shaved with Occam’s Razor.” Upon asking him he shows me the entire motif. We laugh about it and he asserts that this shirt is one of his favorites. “Occam’s razor,” the idea that among competing hypotheses the one with the least unnecessary assumptions is the best and “the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred”36 matches Christian’s attitude perfectly. This corresponds with my observation that it is simplicity and efficiency that characterize his way of thinking.

Jürgen Feige: DEVELOPER IN A BATHTUB The Wilhelminenhof campus of the University of Applied Arts and Sciences is located in an industrial compound with roots in the 19th century. Students commute to the main entrance of the campus via tram trains, which pass along large factories built from yellow brick. Here and there smokestacks tell stories of a long forgotten era when steel production plants and cable manufacturers dominated the quarter. The entrance of the university is conspicuous by its green logo cubes that leave a somehow modern and technology-related impression on the visitors. Jürgen Feige has his office on the fifth floor of a recently renovated building, from which one has a magnificent view of the quarter. The inside of the building appears full of light and totally modern – from an above atrium the sunlight illuminates the spacious floors. On the walls the remnants of old steel beams are still visible, reminders of the building’s earlier use as a cable factory. Center to Jürgen Feige’s office is a leather sofa, positioned in a way that it faces the window. From here one can see gables and balustrades, balconies and traditional chimney

36 https://www.britannica.com/topic/Occams-razor



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 93

installations, embedded in an endless mass of green trees. Jürgen Feige is responsible for the computer museum of the university, a virtual museum that shows the exhibits from its physical collection mainly online.

Fig. 36: Jürgen Feige: “Taking a good photograph takes a lot of time and effort.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

RUNS COMPUTER MUSEUM AT UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED ARTS AND SCIENCES

STUDIED PHILOSOPHY

TEACHES MUSEUM STUDIES DIGITAL IMAGE MANIPULATIONS HAVE THEIR ROOTS IN ANALOG PHOTOGRAPHY

LEARNED ANALOG PHOTOGRAPHY IN HIS YOUTH

Feige comes walking from the elevator and welcomes me with an ingratiating smile. He wears a checked shirt with a gray V-neck vest and purple borders. His

94 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

office measures about 12 square meters, cupboards and shelves cover most of the walls and the desk is piled high with documents and papers. Next to a computer monitor a number of pictures decorate the wall, documenting and in tribute to the development of the area. He starts chatting about how the area and the campus have changed over the past years. Since the beginning of the millennium the number of students has significantly increased resulting in serious shortage of campus facilities. Pointing at a high-rise tower some hundred meters away, he adds that there are still some options for the expansion of campus buildings. One of the pictures on his office wall shows the so-called “Zieselbau.” Feige draws my attention to the steel framed building with brick walls and a flat roof, erected in the 1920ies by AEG’s (“Allgemeine Electricitäts-Gesellschaft”) architect Ernst Ziesel. Jürgen Feige recalls the “bitter debate” concerning the demolition of this “icon of modernism.” At the time of the “GDR” (Orig. “in der DDR-Zeit”) he tried to avoid this area whenever he could. Back then it was used as an industrial zone, he explains adding the rather revealing remark, “Well, you know what I mean.” He started to work with photography at the age of about 14. Experimenting with analog photography was the “normal” thing to do at that time, he says, including the “mishmash” of chemicals. He originally came from a small village in Thuringia and there it was not easy to buy goods after 1964. Especially Rock’n Roll used to be very popular and that was why he – together with some friends – started to shoot photos from (West German) TV. That was not easy and they more or less improvised the process. They worked with developer in the bathtub and used the wardrobe as a darkroom. “One had to climb into it with the developing tank,” then the others shut the door and thereby created a darkroom. The rest was about “stirring, stirring, shaking, shaking,” he laughs. First of all they produced a photograph of Petula Clark and sold 15 copies for 1 mark a copy. Considering the price for beer (54 Pfennige/liter) 15 marks “were really something.” Ever since he has never stopped engaging in photography, but today he mainly shoots photos of landscapes or motifs from nature. When he started photography he only took black and white pictures because colored photography was way too expensive. The material came from Czechoslovakia and he and his friends only could expose and process small formats. They normally produced images that were not more than 10 cm high. In his institute, he comments, it is still possible to experiment with analogue photography, but it is only used for demonstrative purposes. The students occasionally make “a photogram” to learn how such technique works. “The emphasis sure is on digital photography,” thus leading to the topic of our conversation. In his opinion people claim that image manipulation is tightly connected to the development of digital techniques but in his eyes this is “of course nonsense.” It was made use of much earlier and analog photography can hardly be understood without it.



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 95

Andreas Lange: THE GAMING EXPERIENCE

Fig. 37: Andreas Lange: “Images in a computer museum are intrinsically linked to aspects of time and motion.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015.

Walking towards the museum for computer games from a nearby subway station the visitors pass a oversized billboard, which advertises the institution. An unusually broad walkway of about 20 meters in width distances the front of the houses from the arterial road with its long columns of cars on their way in and out of the city center. As I walk to the museum on a nice day in early June the sun is shining and the lightning conditions are just perfect. In the foyer of the museum there is a group of life-sized comic figures in extravagant poses and uniforms. They definitely are the colorful incarnations of computer game heroes. Behind the counter, museum employees give visitors a friendly welcome.

Moving Images The museum’s director Andreas Lange guides me to a sterile, white painted, small conference room with high windows that at first glance reminds me of a prison

96 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

cell. In the beginning of the conversation he points out that due to his disciplinary background he adopts the perspective of cultural history rather than the one of computer sciences. “I only have about a fifty-per-cent association with computer sciences.” After chatting a little about the Interdisciplinary Laboratory and before really getting the interview started, he offers coffee. Andreas Lange wears the museum’s corporate T-shirt making him look rather informal. He somehow reminds me of some hacker or computer-nerd and his appearance clearly is not in line with the cliché of an average museum manager. At the same time he appears focused, well organized and intellectually fit as he thoroughly analyzes the questions I ask trying to comprehend and delve into the subject matter more deeply. MANAGING DIRECTOR OF BERLIN’S MUSEUM FOR COMPUTER GAMES

EXHIBITING GAMING EXPERIENCE IMAGES ARE NOT ONLY VISUAL AND STATIC OBJECTS, BUT THEY APPEAL TO ALL SENSES

HOLDS A DEGREE IN RELIGIOUS STUDIES

MUSEUM PRESERVES CULTURAL HISTORY OF COMPUTER GAMES

In the course of the interview Andreas Lange approaches the issue with a strongly practice-oriented perspective. He gives concrete examples from his professional work to make certain aspects more comprehensible. Images play a role in the museum in all kinds of forms and are used for various purposes – as exhibition posters for advertisement purposes, as objects of documentation, as stills and “rough draft recordings” on the presentation level. When he cites examples from the exhibition it becomes visible how much he identifies with the agenda of the museum. He anticipates the visitor’s perspective as well as the gamer’s and he also makes allowances for those visitors who are less experienced with games. He conceives the artifacts in the museum as interactive objects, as tools for teaching and learning as well as representations of a collection, which have to be preserved. Images from games, he stresses, are intrinsically linked to aspects of time and dynamic sensory aspects like sound, music and motion – not just static representations. The core mission of the museum is to exhibit the cultural history of computer games. Being well informed about the mechanics of gaming and the psychological effects that playing games can have, he appears a little reserved when asked about his own practical experience with games. Games to him are a



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 97

cultural expression of a certain era that reflect the cultural changes society has gone through in the face of the digital revolution.

Alexander Struck: GRAPHITI AND GRAPHS

Fig. 38: Alexander Struck: “A good scholarly image visualizes data and makes them understandable, it conveys information and provides a context for its interpretation.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016.

The Institute for Library and Information Science is located in a historic building on the Humboldt University Berlin campus. Long hallways stretch out in the direction of spacious interiors where traces of the past are visible in many details. The roof is leaking, the walls recount stories of past generations and some of the windows show the original edge grinding. Here and there flyers and brochures are left lying on the cornices and tables and old posters are affixed to the walls. I visit Alexander Struck in his office at the institute at about noon. The room measures about 10 square meters and on entering I stumble over a bicycle that Alexander has parked right behind his door. A massive whiteboard, which appears somehow too big for the room is placed on the left side with its wings wide open

98 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

and completely covered with notes and notations. On the right a row of monitors is positioned on desks and below the window on the floor I detect a small refrigerator. I use an empty spot on his table to set up my camera, while Alexander raises his eyebrows skeptically. He obviously is not very happy about the installation of my camera because – as he puts it – he considers his room not properly tidied and cleaned up. He agrees, on condition that I take pictures of the room at its best and that I am going to use the material exclusively for purposes of observation and analysis. Alexander in his white, well-ironed shirt sits on a comfortable swivel chair. RESEARCH FELLOW AT THE INTERDISCIPLINARY LABORATORY

STUDIED INFORMATION SCIENCE

LIKES TO DESIGN FONTS

USES DATA VISUALIZATIONS OF COMPLEX STRUCTURES IS INTERESTED IN GRAFFITI ON THE CITY WALLS

The first network graph that Alexander ever saw gave him a concept of where his “scientific path” would lead him – and it sounds as if the image had some kind of power over him that he was not able to resist. “In private” he was interested in fonts and “good typography.” In the interview Alexander speaks much more slowly than he normally does enunciating word for word, as if he has to carve them out of a rock or as if it takes him a lot of effort to give comprehensible answers. I have to ask him over and over again to get a clear picture of what he thinks. He reports that he is interested in graffiti and that he pays close attention to this “form of expression” when walking the streets of the city. He collects these “remains of the sprayers” in his memory, but not in any other form. Every now and then he sits down in front of his drawing board to design fonts. This is a “helpful technique” to visualize his thoughts and ideas. I ask him whether there is some sort of connection to his scientific work and he confirms that he is in favor of “good typography” when it comes to publishing. “I am paying attention to such details,” he affirms. When designing posters he uses LaTeX, or Scribus. For his work he produces “data visualizations of complex structures” and “diagrams to visualize signal values.” Occasionally, he mentions, he has developed visualizations for publications of other scientists. By using images he is capable of “reading images” of other scientists as well. Listening to the way Alexander Struck speaks leaves the impression that he is not a man of many words. He appears focused and it seems as if he pays close attention to the technical terms and expressions he uses. In conversations with



4.1 Introducing the Informants 

 99

colleagues he tends to explain his views employing discipline specific language and always adding, that certain things are to be understood in a certain way, in “his world.” Alexander tends to defend his positions against opposing views. It seems as if he wants to sensitize others regarding his disciplinary viewpoints or as if he intends to put the world in order by using his own defined vocabulary.

Summary There are some shared motives among informants from the field of computer science. Alexander Struck and Christian Stein both explain how certain imaging techniques shaped their professional career, but images do not seem to play a core role for their scholarly work at present. They use them in order to summarize and communicate data or to explain theoretical concepts. Jürgen Feige explains in detail how he acquired his photographic skills – skills that have played a core role for his professional work until today. For Andreas Lange images are tightly linked to various purposes of museum work and he instantly thinks of the multiple dimensions images have in computer games, which go well beyond mere visual representations, including sound and motion.

4.1.5 Conclusions This chapter provided a first impression of the informants who participated in the interview project – partly an impression of the circumstances under which I met them and some first details of how the informants portrayed their working agenda. Though these sketches do not comprehensively explain why and how informants use images in their work and what guidelines they apply when producing or editing images, they provide some valuable insights of the associations informants have when reflecting upon images. Some early conclusions can be drawn: for example, some of the informants automatically associate images with practical aspects of their work. They think about images as tools for the evaluation of products, for setting up exhibitions, for developing ideas or for documenting observations, mainly aspects that are linked to aims and purposes they expect to achieve with their work. Others automatically think of images as objects that have to be treated with respect, a view shared by many art historians, or as representations of scientific findings, like some of the biologists claimed. There are informants who highlight aspects of perception and how the viewer must be educated in order to properly grasp the information in images.

100 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Most importantly, almost all of the informants had individual stories to tell about how images left an imprint in their lives. Images that people remember over time seem to be emotionally loaded. For Horst Bredekamp it was Picasso’s light drawings that shaped his life and formed a starting point for his academic career and Regine Hengge explained how being exposed to art in her childhood shaped her ability to perceive, to critically analyze and understand images. In fact, such examples provide insights of how images can be used for constructing colorful biographical narratives and images are remembered because they shaped individual experiences. Applying the ecology metaphor it can be asked whether certain types or species of image workers could be classified? Some of the designers shared standpoints that left a highly individualistic or artistic impression, some of the computer scientists appeared more like matter-of-fact analysts and others, mainly some of the curators, seemed to represent utilitarian positions. Designers and computer scientists appear to have in common that they use images (at least partly) as tools, while art historians and biologists are likely to share a certain respectful attitude towards images. Of course, applying such categories at this point would mean oversimplifying and ignoring the complexity of the ecologies in which the informants are embedded. Regarding everything the informants shared it can be assumed that the aims and purposes they try to achieve with their work must have a measurable impact on their strategies when manipulating images.

4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image The word image is without any doubt a frequently used term and for many dealing with images has become part of the daily routine in various private and professional contexts. Images literally are everywhere and because of their omnipresence the question “What is an image?” might therefore seem like a five-year-old asking why the sky is blue. Moreover, analyzing visual strategies and the guidelines scholars apply in order to control information in images might raise the question of “how” rather than “what.” Nevertheless by looking at how informants conceive and contextualize the term I intend to discern to what extent they consider theoretical aspects relevant for working with images, or, in other words’, what do scholars actually have in mind, when talking about images? Do scholars refer to paintings, digital objects, mental and physical representations, microscopic images, movie stills, analog or digital representations when they apply the term? Asking the informants about their understanding of the term may help to give a first hint whether informants consider theoretical concepts relevant for their work with images.



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 101

Likewise one could look at this from a reverse angle, assuming someone has never thought about the term and its definition and implications before – however, the question arises whether this is perceived as a lack of professionality or sheer ignorance or disguised by making up some ad-hoc definition? Or are the informants ready to rather openly admit a knowledge gap? It is certainly a truism to claim that perception plays a core role in how the information in images can be seen, but still the question is in fact whether perception affects the intellectual understanding of images as well. Let us for a moment imagine the bright side of the moon. Shadows from craters, which are formed by meteorite impacts during prehistoric times, become visible to the eye. Where sunlight lightens up the surface we recognize crater walls, surrounded by inscrutable black matter. Maybe we see this image through a telescope or as a projection in a planetarium, as a digital image on a screen, in a book or on a poster. How does the way we perceive the image influence the way we understand it? How is the inherent information influenced by the way an image is composed? How do e.g. aspects of coloring, size or brightness affect the information that the viewer perceives? Comparing the various statements being made by the participants in this interview project, broadly speaking four basic answering-strategies can be distinguished. First, there are those for whom an image means an umbrella term that implies a multitude of sub-items (“Image as open or Generic Term”). Second, there are those who see an image as a result of human creative decisions (“Form Oriented Interventions in Natural Structures”). Third there are informants, who consider an image as some vague perceptual phenomenon (“Image as Visual Stimuli”), and fourth, informants who instead of defining the term try to explain it by focusing on the more practical aspects of images for their work (“The Practical Approach: Effects, Tools and Functions”).

4.2.1 Image as Open or Generic Term Language is a powerful tool for scholars in order to make sense of their world. Often, scholars develop linguistic categories or classifications whenever confronted with complex problems. But of course there are terms that cannot easily be comprehended and have more than only one meaning and the term image certainly is among them. In my encounters with the informants I experienced that there are many ways of coping with the limits of knowledge and it is not uncommon that people show non-verbal reactions like laughing or sighing when they do not have a ready-made answer. This does not apply to Jürgen Feige who runs the computer museum at the University of Applied Arts and Sciences Berlin. When I ask him to give his

102 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

definition of image he smiles friendly, but openly replies: “I can’t answer this.” This is, he goes on, “because then (he) has to avoid the question by naming the respective medium.” (Orig. “Bildträger”) He gives me a sideways glance and then looks out of the window. He explains that he would have to make an “historical digression” to answer this question and – next to the medium – would have to relate to the materials used and the objectives that are pursued through images. While he is still trying to think of a comprehensive answer he lists aspects like materiality, time, and context – all of them doubtlessly important for the understanding of images. Then, as if he feels way off topic, he repeats that therefore he would “avoid the question” and that he is not able to answer the question as directly as he wants to. As a trained philosopher he is “in favor of defined terminology” he adds – looking at me sincerely sorry about the fact he is not able to deliver a more encompassing explanation. It is as if the lack of a clear definition makes it much harder for him to talk about the subject. While speaking he rotates to and fro on his swivel chair and gestures with both hands. Being asked how he would describe the term “medium” he repeats he would rather refer to the material aspects to explain it. A painter works with color on canvas and likewise whenever someone wants to represent reality photography certainly is an appropriate medium, he expounds. Working with photography makes it possible for almost everyone to achieve satisfactory results. More difficulties occur with image manipulations in the digital sphere, which basically remain invisible. In order to keep the information under control, one is “thrown back to clean object descriptions, such as in museums.” Though Feige initially claims that he cannot provide a comprehensive definition, he still tries to approach the term image by naming aspects that are in some way related to his practical work. For his identity as a teacher, as someone who works intensely with images and as a trained philosopher it is challenging that he cannot deliver a clear definition. Some ambivalence can be felt: he obviously does not need a definition in his daily work, but as a scholar he believes in the relevance of clear-cut concepts. Designer Anouk Hoffmeister exclaims an astonished “Oh my God” and “what is an image for me?” when asked about her understanding of the term. It is “somehow crass” because to her “of course” all kinds of illustrations and objects of “all kinds” can be images. They may be hand drawn, digital sketches, photographs in “all kinds of variations” and paintings. While speaking she keeps her hands on the table and looks slightly upwards, moving her head back and forth. Even some “setting” or “space” to her can be an image. Clearly, she understands the term as being rather vague and open and it appears as if she has just started to think about it. She explains how “the definition widely used in the laboratory is not really applicable for her” – as it is way beyond of how she defines the term.



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 103

To her regarding anything created by humans as image is an “intellectual scam” and thus not relevant. She obviously does not need a definition of what an image is and it is clear how she sees herself as a practitioner in contrast to all the theorists in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory. On a red keychain lying in front of her on the table it says “Into the wild” in English. As if she wants to distance herself from such “intellectual scamming” she reports how in her research she plans to visually translate the interrelation of objects for “a working space of the future” and to create a physical impression of objects in the virtual realm. In her eyes, producing meaningful results does not require theoretical reflections. She rather sees herself as devoted to producing clearly defined products that help shaping a future reality. Although Anouk states that she is personally not very fond of theoretical debates about a definition of the term image she does not flatly reject to think about it in the context and for the purpose of our conversation. This is not surprising since intellectual exchange is of important value in the laboratory. It is interesting to see how on the one hand Anouk distances herself from a theoretical approach but on the other hand improvises ad hoc answers as comprehensible and as convincing as possible. Gregor Hagedorn from the Museum of Natural History agrees with Anouk Hoffmeister in the sense that he considers the topic “a complicated question.” He tries to fill the term by establishing classes and categories. First, there is a clear “difference between copy (Orig. “Abbild”) and creative image.” The term image to him represents a “generic term including photography, graphics, drawings, paintings – meaning, stationary images.” Accordingly it is possible to establish “sub-groups, like charcoal etchings, computer renderings, or photos.” He is not ready to really subsume “moving images” under the umbrella of the term image as an exception, he adds, but he takes a moment to reconsider whether his statement really is consistent. Gregor Hagedorn seems to be rather relaxed in his swivel chair, wearing a grey, woolen sweater over a white shirt with only collar and cuffs visible. Fixed to a keychain around his neck he carries his employee ID card, which gives him a professional and somehow official look. He rests his elbows on the arms of his chair and supports his remarks by waving his hands, drawing imaginary circles with his fingers spread. He adds that he was not quite sure whether that was “inherent in the logic of the term,” or a consequence of “the fact that it (the visualization technique) is still new.” Thereby, he implies, the understanding of images is constantly changing with the development of new technologies and techniques. A mobile computer carried on one’s wrist when doing sports today may tomorrow simply be called a “wristwatch.” Hagedorn speaks in a somber voice and he is slowly and carefully choosing his words. He would rather see three-dimensional objects as

104 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

“copies” or “sculptures.” The “Archaeopteryx” (a famous fossil and key object for the museum) is presented in a frame and illuminated by a flat spotlight so that the three-dimensional surface becomes visible is an interesting example, because it appears flat and can “almost” be perceived as an image – but it remains a three-dimensional object, it is not an image, he accentuates. After a moment he attentively adds, that the thought crossed his mind that there are paleontological imprints that are completely two-dimensional and that “traces of iron on the surface only became visible through colors.” He pauses for a moment and then mentions he actually never thought about such aspects before. His solicitous and well-structured way of approaching the problem renders him an air of authority and the categories he thereby develops are thoroughly well conceived. Nevertheless, he seems to be aware that it is hard to establish all-embracing categories that cover all possible manifestations of images. At the same time it is clear that theoretical aspects are not a pressing concern for him. From the way he speaks he leaves the impression as if it is just a luxury purely and simple to spend some extra time pondering about this subject.

Summary The main advantage of defining image as a generic term is that it provides scholars with the opportunity of including a wide variety of visual presentations and representations in one comprehensive concept. Although some of the participants agree to the fact that image is to be understood as an umbrella term, they automatically link the term to their individual professional usage. Hoffmeister does not see a necessity for such a definition – in her understanding there is no need for it, because her work is practice-oriented, and Hagedorn attempts to classify sub-categories as if “image” is some sort of biological species. There is no doubt that a theoretical concept does not play a crucial role for the participants’ professional occupation with images. Only Jürgen Feige openly acknowledges that he cannot procure a clear-cut definition – nevertheless he puts some effort into finding a comprehensive explanation.

4.2.2 “Shape-related Interventions in Natural Structures” Establishing categories and sub-categories is one way of making sense of the term image. Another strategy is to make the frame even larger. One may very well ask what a Hundertwasser-façade, a Bacon painting, a pipe, a shop design and a fish tank have in common? All of them may be regarded as images, no



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 105

matter whether they are two-dimensional or three-dimensional – depending on how extensive the definition is. The formulation “shape-related interventions in natural structures” goes back to Horst Bredekamp, speaker of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory, who thus defines images as all objects that are shaped even to a minimal degree by humans. He claims it is highly complicated to define image, because it is similar to trying to define the terms “philosophy” or “life.” It is especially the “omnipotence or multivalency of language that derives meaning from the vague” that makes it greatly challenging to clearly define the term. He remembers how he “over and over again” tried to clarify the term in the course of his academic career. After many attempts, the “most general (definition, TB) has emerged,” he explains. He is confronted with the paradox that one has to speak of image as soon “as a natural object is manipulated in any noticeable way, even with minimal intrusion.” (Orig. „(…) nämlich überall dort, wo der Mensch erkennbarer Weise mit einem Minimum an Eingriff in ein Naturobjekt eingegriffen hat.”) Bredekamp refers to Renaissance author Leon Battista Alberti who in his work De Statua described how minimal manipulations on root systems transform a natural object into a piece of art. Bredekamp regards Alberti’s concept as the most comprehensive and encompassing one that defined “even a chair in its shape, a glass, a fresco by Raffael” as images. Horst Bredekamp holds his reading glasses in his left hand, the frame bridge between his fingers. He speaks slowly and a little nasally – as if he has caught a cold. “Under no circumstances,” he stresses, “are only two-dimensional structures to be addressed as images,” but “formal interventions,” “or” – he expounds more precisely – “shape related interventions in natural structures” produce images. He lowers his voice and pauses for a moment to signal that his statement is complete. He tilts his head forward for a second, opens his eyes widely, gazes at me gravely and full of expectation. Though he has initially claimed that the term lacks an accurate definition his statement leaves the impression that there may indeed be an all-embracing way of delineating the term. However, it is important to mention in this context that this definition deeply shaped intellectual concepts in the laboratory. Bredekamp thus established a form of “official” image definition for the purpose of interdisciplinary collaboration. In this setting it is interesting to ask how informants from the laboratory relate and internalize such a definition and whether it has influence on their practical work. One may compare the significance of intellectual concepts with terms from gardening: does controlling the seeds automatically mean controlling the crop? Can the implementation of a shared definition of images be understood as a measure to make the interdisciplinary work group more efficient and to prevent fruitless arguments? Sticking to the comparison, can checking the seeds be considered a suitable means for

106 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

tilling the soil successfully? Does adopting a definition make it easier for scholars to practically come to terms with their daily application of images? Interestingly enough even representatives from outside the research project mention concepts similar to the one mentioned above. Bodo Baumunk explains with emphasis that image to him means “in the meanwhile almost everything that is not text.” There has to be “at least some form of human intervention” to label something as an image, he points out. “It takes some creation, not necessarily an intended one,” but a form of human influence has to be visible to classify something as an image. Despite all this, he claims he has never read anything at all about how the term image is defined, which makes it totally impossible for him to reproduce any such thing (meaning whatever he says is the result of his own intellectual work). Baumunk has put his glasses into the front pocket of his jacket and he speaks with attention to detail and with devotion, while staring at the white tablecloth. Every now and then he pauses and eats large chunks of cake, covered with cream. He answers my questions with a routine of critically shaking his head, as if he has a problem getting their proper meaning – only to answer them instantly in much detail. His nonverbal behavior leaves the impression that critically questioning intellectual ideas has become second nature to him. Speaking of himself he alternates between a more personal “I” and the impersonal “one” (in German: “ich” or “man”) – as if he is speaking about himself from a higher and more objective standpoint. As outlined above, Bredekamp’s definition has a measurable impact on researchers in the laboratory. For example, biologist Carola Becker mentions that she is unable to free herself “from what ‘we’ in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory define as image” and explains that in that sense image does not only refer to “two-dimensional objects which normally are understood as ‘images’,” but also “sculptures, installations” and “any scenario” that is manipulated or processed by humans. Designer Carola Zwick refers to Bredekamp’s “broadened concept of an image” as well. In the early days of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory she had to work it out for herself, she explains, sitting next to a big white table in her spacious office at the 7.5 studios in Berlin-Charlottenburg. She used to understand image somehow differently, as “rather two-dimensional.” She is of the opinion that for her work the concept of image is not crucial and she generally prefers to speak of “prototypes” or “simulations,” instead of images. Reflecting Bredekamp’s definition she has come to understand image as anything “crafted by humans or manipulated by humans.” According to her an intellectual confrontation and the establishment of a shared terminology are considered indispensable for understanding each other in an interdisciplinary context.

4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 



 107

The definition is important, but ambiguous and I had a series of encounters and meetings and conversations, in which again and again people first had to understand how the term ‘image’ was used. That certainly caused frictions and irritations.37

Consequently she sees Bredekamp’s definition as a key to avoiding endless, tiresome, frustrating discussions and misunderstandings. In her eyes such misunderstandings are simply a waste of time and resources.

Summary For some of the participants, adapting Bredekamp’s “broadened concept” can be interpreted as a more or less pragmatic move, since it provides researchers who have never dealt with the theoretical side of images with some intellectual orientation. At the same time informants reveal that this concept somehow deviates from what they “normally” used to define as image (i.e. images are two dimensional and ideally are placed on a wall). The fact that intellectual concepts can be replaced or exchanged without too much effort clearly shows that they are supposedly of little relevance for practical scholarly work. If replacing or exchanging a concept is that easy, does this not imply that there is a clear gap between what researchers think in theory and what they do in practice?

4.2.3 Image as Visual Stimuli Scientists today assume that about 60 percent of the cerebral cortex of the brain is in one way or other involved in the process of visual perception. This process is complex and not yet fully explored in many of its dimensions. It can be measured that it only takes 50 to 70 milliseconds for an image to travel from the retina to the visual cortex where about not less than 200 million neurons are involved in processing visual information (Lang 2014, 44). Most of this process takes place subconsciously and is beyond control, unless we close our eyes. But even then the neurons do not stop firing and the brain retains a wide spectrum of impressions in our memory. It may be due to an awareness of these capacities of the visual sense that a third group of informants relates to aspects of perception in order to make sense of the term. Art historian Angela Boesl explains that from an “art historian’s perspective any form of panel painting or graphic reproduction or drawing” may be 37 Interview on June 6, 2014.

108 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

understood as an image. She holds her breath for a moment and then adds that the term is even more multi-layered when taking new media into account. Then there of course is photography and “everything I encounter visually,” she adds, thus extending the definition. It is not relevant whether something appears in print or “somehow drawn on the ground,” or whether it is “projected on to a wall” – there are so many possibilities for images to appear and to be perceived. “Okay, oh God,” she says, “what is ‘image’ to me? Yes, I think I cannot really define the term.” But when looking at the problem from a reverse angle she points out that “a performance” to her is not “necessarily” an image. Speaking from a “disciplinary perspective” – in which the classical art genres are taught, she would rather exclude architecture or sculpture from the definition. Images are the product of what is expressed through a certain medium. She personally could agree with such a position. “It is so classical what is taught there (in art history, TB) and of course it comprises the complete stylistic canon through all epochs” she finishes her train of thought. A contradiction becomes apparent between what is taught in her discipline and the statement that in the end any “visual encounter” can be approved of or can be labeled as an image. Like Gregor Hagedorn she is fully aware of the fact that technological innovations challenge the “classical” understanding of images and that “new media” contribute to the complexity of the term, but she has no clear idea of how this affects the understanding of images. She perceives images as closely connected to the senses, so that almost anything visible can be regarded as an image. What she learned in her discipline, this somehow “classical” understanding of the term that mainly refers to images as objects, seems to be in conflict with her present every-day experiences. Designer and movie director Marc Tamschick supports an even broader concept. He instantaneously exclaims, “Wow, this is a super nasty topic.” He ponders for a moment and goes on specifying his view. Image for him is first and foremost a carrier of some “color information, an information of light.” Maybe, he adds, this “is just enough and sufficient,” but after a moment’s thought he admits that this definition does not cover all aspects of what images are. He explains that putting this a little more emotionally one may say images reflect “the attempt” to preserve something in “time and space,” no matter whether one refers to a “painting or sculpture or a photo.” Marc Tamschick places his hands on the wide, black office desk. Right behind him on the wall I see large pin boards with numerous printed-out-images of stage designs (obviously from some current or recent project). He tilts his head and stares at the opposite wall as if there is something interesting to look at. There is of course this “classical definition of image” but he prefers a “larger concept.” It is all about preserving something in representative or artistic forms, he continues and pauses for a moment before going on pensively to explain that



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 109

any “concrete form” narrows the concept too much. If he were obliged to define the term in a more general way he would readjust his statement, it would be about preserving time, space and light to “express a certain idea or vision.” In Tamschick’s office everything appears neat and tidy, well thought through and carefully arranged. Images in his view are a means to an end and the respective purpose deeply affects their understanding. His rather ample concept of images corresponds to his experimental target-oriented way of using images in all kinds of forms and manifestations. Though aspects of perception play an important role in his reflections, he mainly sees images as the product of an intentional, target-oriented creative process. Like Tamschick biologist Regine Hengge reacts emotionally and exclaims “dear me”! In her opinion no coherent definition exists. In general “any graphical visualization or whatever is visual can become an image.” According to her experience, science uses “different types of images.” These include “simple visual data recordings” that can become important parts of figures in publications as well as images that are “complex” in the sense that they represent scientific conclusions or novel hypotheses based on a lot of data that are condensed in a graphical model. Today these images are not made by hand, like in former times, but with the support of “various graphics programs.” Her coworkers provide images generated during experiments for her, since she no longer works “at the bench,” but she produces the more conceptual drawings and images for her scientific talks and publications. The model images that play a role in her work do not reflect reality per se, she claims, but they translate data as well as concepts and ideas into a visible form and human viewing patterns. Above a white sideboard not far from the table two prints on the wall show partially false-colored scanning electron microscopic images of the surface of bacterial aggregates called biofilms that look like bizarre landscapes. In a wall niche close to the door the front image of a calendar shows a large red-colored bacterial colony.

Summary Scholars who conceive images as some vague visual stimulus mostly argue on the basis of individual experiences or more precisely, they focus the perspective of the viewer. However, highlighting aspects of perception contributes to an awareness of the multitude of visual impressions that can be featured as images. This sensitizes the scholars to the complexity of the problem and underlines the fact that images have to be compatible with human viewing patterns. Portraying the visual sense as a constant image producing mechanism and consequently defining image vaguely as a visual phenomenon may provide scholars with some

110 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

definition of the term, notwithstanding the fact that there are still a lot of unresolved issues.

4.2.4 Tool – Agency – Representation Though many of the informants admit that the term image is hard to define, most of them do not hesitate to make up ad hoc concepts or relate to more practical aspects they identify with images. It seems as if accepting a certain level of ignorance is regarded as inadequate behavior for scholars. Thus, some of the informants try to fill this term with contents by relating to disciplinary viewpoints; others try to define it from the perspective of their practical experiences or through highlighting aspects of image use. Their answering strategies can at least partly be interpreted as a way of concealing the fact that it is not an easy task to come up with concepts that explain the entire phenomenon. But due to the fact that I requested their expert opinions it maybe not such a total surprise that participants rather aimed at trying to provide comprehensive answers than accepting certain levels of ignorance on their part. Stage designer Andreas Pinkow is an example of how deeply the understanding of images is shaped by personal experiences and the story of one’s life. He studied painting in Berlin with professor Koberling38 and to him image is “somehow stronger” than language or in other words, the invention of visual language has become a topic he occupies himself with. After a while he realized that he found the “interdisciplinary collaboration” stronger than the individual work of an artist and today he mainly deals with the interplay between image “and other factors” to address various audiences. When creating stage designs it is essential to use images that people are familiar with and then to “build on them image by image.” There only is a “narrow scope of pictorial logic” to combine such elements in an effective way. Working with images therefore implies “attention and distraction,” he reflects, these two poles have to be well balanced. He hesitates for a moment as if he wanted to express that this is all there is to say. Rather than sharing how he theoretically understands the term image, he shares how he uses images in order to achieve his professional aims. Pinkow wears his sleeves rolled up. It is a hot summer day; only a little fresh air drifts through the open window. If images only tried to attract attention – like for example the advertisements in an airport – they would mostly cause unpleasant effects because “each wanted to attract attention at the same time” and all the

38 Bernd Koberling, painter and academic teacher at University of the Arts, Berlin.



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 111

messages would be mingling and consequently producing an annoying cacophony. If not only attention was the exclusive aim, but attention and distraction the resulting “spaces” or “visual rooms” would produce a unique resonance. From this resonance results a fundamental sound and consequently it is possible to play “on every single string.” Not only readability and orientation, but also emotions and learning processes go “hand in hand.” By referring to such accountable and applied image logic he shares a pragmatic, but stimulating view of what images can achieve. In his artistic and unconventional approach he more or less ignores theoretical aspects, but rather explains how he understands the agency in images and the effects they have on a given audience. Images in this sense are a powerful means of communication in order to trigger emotional reactions or associations. They are a key to taking up and activating the experiences and emotions of people and to create resonances and dynamics – a resource that Pinkow uses to dramatize content as if he were the conductor of a symphonic orchestra. Images are in this sense a resource to tie in with to what people already know, – a means of power and control – and a means to play with emotions and expectations. Clearly, as can be learned from such statements, Pinkow sees himself as a narrator who creates images to address the audience. The musical metaphors he uses are a telltale sign for how he sees images as instruments for producing a certain resonance. Other informants are less concerned with the emotional effects of images, but focus on the pragmatic functions of images to explain their essence. For the director of Berlin’s Museum of Computer Games, Andreas Lange, images can be carriers of information or exhibits or both at the same time. Yet he is unsure about whether this really reflects the essence of the term and he adds that he first intends to approach the term “in a classical way to get a notion of what image could be.” Accordingly “it is nothing in writing and no mental metaphor, but the naive, classical image,” that can be seen on a computer screen or on a print out. Taking this into consideration, he adds, the term includes both moving images and still images, – both meet the criteria “so to say of (his) definition of ‘image’.” First he focuses on the purposes and second, he tries to define the term using the exclusion principle. In a similar fashion the curator of photography Theresia Ziehe applies the exclusion principle and claims, “images are not language,” because images are devoid of any linguistic aspect, they communicate meaning “on other levels.” Images are “much broader than language,” she purports. When being asked how visual information can be grasped, she replies, “this is simply not comprehensible.” It depends on “what you see in a picture.” Computer scientist Alexander Struck states briefly, “image (is) an object.” He pauses as if everything has been said about the topic. From his perspective, an object may be physical, or, what he calls “digital.” He picks at the sleeve of his

112 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

white shirt and plays with his cufflinks. Addressing images as objects would help him not to “get bogged down in discussions about the implications of the term.” Digital images are produced using material tools, but he makes a distinction between “image” and “tool.” In “his scientific world” definitions imply boundaries – clearly defined boundaries. But, he adds, these definitions are “not executed” by scholars from other disciplines. From his educational background he sees a necessity to share and discuss concepts, but he is afraid of getting involved in too many fruitless discussions. Generally he would appreciate a clear definition that includes many viewpoints and he would put the necessary effort in discussions with other scholars. But all in all this issue does not seem to be of vital importance to him. Hannelore Hoch from the Museum of Natural History is constantly working with images that capture the anatomy of organisms. We meet in her museum office one Tuesday morning. With a concentrated and a little skeptical look she reads the form of consent I have given to her. After hesitating a little she signs, but only after murmuring something in the way of one has to watch out for what one is saying – she then starts laughing wholeheartedly. In her view, an image represents a subjective copy of reality. The details an image captures are chosen subjectively and in so far it “automatically represents” a subjective view. There is nothing more to say about this, only that images can materialize in all kinds of forms. The reality reflected in an image is “outside (her) perception,” or exists “outside one’s body,” but is a concrete object (Orig. “eine dingliche Sache”) – at least in a scientific context. Obviously the openness of the term irritates her, but nevertheless she tries to find a coherent definition. Beyond this context, she goes on, one can of course understand images as metaphors but “we certainly want to stick to scientific imagery.” Using the personal pronoun “we” she playfully makes me her accomplice, as if we have a mutual interest of keeping the subject under control. She puts her hands on the table and turns her head a little sideways. In the beginning of the conversation her answers are short and concise and rather hesitant, as if she is afraid of saying something wrong, so that I have to ask her over and over again. It seems as if she first wants to ponder about a subject thoroughly before giving a proper answer. Computer scientist Christian Stein regards images as a form of representation (Orig. “Abbildung”) of “a certain source.” This can be an object or an amount of data, language, person or place and this source is transformed into a representation. This again is “in a certain way a reduction, either intentionally or as a result of technology” – in relation to “a specific interpretation.” With one hand he draws an invisible circle into the air that is meant to illustrate his reflections. He sits relaxedly in his swivel chair and sometimes rubs his hands before answering



4.2 Exploring Visual Practices – Conceptualizing the Term Image 

 113

a question. He enjoys his role of an informant and likes giving comprehensive and definitive answers. At the same time he speaks slowly and articulately, as if he wants to make sure all his words are properly understood. He continues along these lines and states that in that sense images can never transform into objects. There might be “such borderline cases,” in which “this has become blurred,” but nonetheless insists on this distinction. Of course one may think of “profoundly different visualizations of an object, regarding the technology involved,” or with respect to what information or content the image is supposed to communicate. The image is “a medium between object and observer”; it serves the purpose to intensify, to filter and to connect the “subject and object position” into a certain direction. Depending on how one perceives the term or on how one uses images the term permanently undergoes changes.

Summary A number of informants cited in this chapter approach the problem of defining the term image by applying the exclusion principle. However, this only leads to the insight of how complex the term is. For example, Ziehe and Lange claim that images are not texts and that images convey information “on different levels.” Struck and Stein use the term “object” in order to define image, but they apply the concept in different ways. For Stein images are representations of a certain source, whereas Struck regards images as objects. He makes it abundantly clear that he has no desire to “get bogged down” in fruitless discussions about the nature of the term. Hoch sees images as representations of what scholars observe in their work. Most of the informants approach the term by relating to practical aspects of their work and claim that a definition of the term image is dependent on respective individual work contexts. Their answering strategies are an indirect expression and a distinct indication of how challenging it is for them to define the term.

4.2.5 Conclusions In summary, my overall impression is that only few informants see a clear necessity for establishing theoretical concepts. Obviously dealing theoretically with images is not yet a well-established part of disciplinary education or training, or it is simply considered unnecessary. Some of the participants’ claim that there has to be a classical definition, but in lack of it resort to individual concepts mostly derived from practical work-experience. For most informants images

114 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

seem to be well-known tools in their everyday work. Some researchers assure that without a specific given context it is impossible for them to theoretically deal with the term. It can be concluded that theoretical concepts are neither a pressing issue in most of the fields, nor do they affect or influence the practical work with images significantly. Few participants straightforwardly state that they do not need a definition of the term for their work and point out that theoretical reflections about it are just about pointless (cf. designer Anouk Hoffmeister). Some of the informants (Bredekamp or Hengge) affirm that the term naturally escapes any coherent definition and many others have a problem with this. But – despite such judgments – all the informants try to find explanations as if it is some sort of either professional or disciplinary obligation. One could explain this by applying ecology metaphors: like bees that ferment the honey in a beehive by adding enzymes from their stomachs and by fanning it with their wings, even the exchange of information in a collaborative research project requires constant activity by all the participants. Scholarly work in such a sense is about acquiring and sharing knowledge, about understanding a phenomenon and finding a suitable explanation that convinces other scholars or even the public. At the same time even in scholarly contexts, ignorance is not always regarded solely and simply as a problem. Or, as Robert Proctor formulates: Ignorance is most commonly seen (or trivialized) in this way, as something in need of correction, a kind of natural absence or void where knowledge has not yet spread. (…) But ignorance is more than a void-and not even always a bad thing. (Proctor 2008, 2)

Despite this, like outlined above, most of the informants in this study preferred knowledge to ignorance. From my observations and many of the participants’ statements I got the impression that images are in a way self-explanatory and as if whoever has eyes and eyesight is able to see and understand them. Albersmeyer-Bingen discussed the need to critically reflect common sense-perspectives in science and pointed out how problematic it is to ignore their normative powers: Nicht der fällt ihm (the common sense, TB) anheim, der ihn problematisiert, sondern der, der seine normative Faktizität verkennt. (Albersmeyer-Bingen 1986, 20)

However, in face of the diversity and variety of opinions outlined above, it is remarkable that under certain preconditions it is feasible for scholars to agree upon a shared concept. One of the reasons might be that in the Interdisciplinary Laboratory collaborations among researchers are regarded a core value and this is why Bredekamp’s definition is accepted as an intellectual common ground by



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 115

a number of participants. At the same time the practical work with images obviously does not require a theoretical fundament, or how else can it be explained that it is possible to work with a borrowed definition. Its main function can be seen for the purpose of communication in a multi-disciplinary work context. What is more, there is a tendency among the participants to identify the term image with still images, such as photography. Images are mainly (with some exceptions) understood as something static, motionless and soundless. If images are important for intellectual collaboration in this ecology in a sense that they provide meaning and identity, having clear concepts of how images are understood must still be relevant at least to some extent. The paradox is that despite this assumption it seems as if diverging concepts do not really affect the proper functioning of the system. The fundamental challenge of defining what is to be understood by “image” (and in which context) does not seem to limit the ability of practically and theoretically dealing with images. One conclusion that can be drawn from this is that a sensible level of uncertainty is tolerated and that it does neither affect the intellectual work with images, nor the use of images for other scholarly purposes.

4.3 Approaching the Invisible In order to understand the logics, which guide informants in their work with images, this chapter will focus on how participants think of the meaning and understanding of the invisible. This might sound odd because images are mostly understood as something visible to the eye, – something made to be seen. Maybe approaching this issue in a counter-intuitive manner is a way for scholars to reflect on the conditions under which visual information is produced and processed? This definitely happens by triggering informants to reflect upon what is not visible or cannot be visualized. Sorensen pointed out how studying the opposite of a phenomenon can help to gain valuable insights: There are many more ways for something not to happen than to happen. Consequently, it is simpler (both numerically and qualitatively) to focus on the positive. How do physicians promote health? By studying disease. How do diplomats cultivate peace? By studying war. This suggests that color scientists will make the most progress on studying black by studying light and chromaticity. (Sorensen 2008, 217)

From a reverse angle my assumption here is that there is something to be learned from how scholars conceive the invisible, from their associations and outlooks, from their intentions and expectations.

116 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

4.3.1 In Search of Clarity – Strategies of Visualization in Biology Hannelore Hoch exclaims an astonished “oh” when I ask her about how the invisible affects her work and she immediately affirms that it plays a significant role. Only with previous knowledge one can produce an exact representation of what is observed. She sits upright with her hands on the table, smiling gently. When interpreting the anatomy of a cicada, which she studied, this certainly played a role. Because this previous knowledge was crucial, the taxidermists at the Museum of Natural History regularly went to the zoo to study the movement patterns of the organisms they wanted to preserve. They had to understand “how animals moved and how the individual groups of muscles looked like in which posture” she stresses and then takes an instant to think. Currently, she is working with the artist Oliver Thie39 who has been struggling with the same exact problem. He has planned to produce a gigantic ink drawing of one of the small organisms she devotes her research to. The image is designed to be several meters in height and width and is expected to allow fundamentally different views on these organisms. The problem was that without the knowledge of the living conditions of these small cicadas, he could not portray them correctly. He was only familiar with the dead ones. To stress her point she shows a book with illustrations of these insects, scrolls through the pages and points with her finger at some of the details. It was not possible for her to explain to him how these animals really looked like, she thoughtfully adds – he had to see them for himself. Of course he could not fly to Hawaii only to study patterns of activity (there is a twinkle in her eyes) – therefore it was an advantage that related species existed in the “Mosel region,” so that he could go there to “examine one of these living specimen.” In her eyes the invisible is identified with limits of knowledge, or with previous knowledge that is necessary to draw the right conclusions. “The invisible?” Regine Hengge first asks pensively and takes a moment to think. As a molecular biologist she has been working “for decades” with bacteria she never really saw. Only in recent years the viewing habits and needs in her research projects have changed profoundly, so that cells and structured aggregates of cells more and more have become the focus, and not only cell cultures in test tubes. This reflected a change of perspective because although cells have always been at the heart of her research the focus was “on molecules” and how they interacted and related to each other in order to build and operate a cell. Maybe it sounds surprising, but “molecular biologists do not look at their object of interest” but largely reconstruct it from indirect evidence. That is sometimes a

39 http://www.oliverthie.de/images/riesenzikade_expose.pdf. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 117

weird feeling, she expounds. The main thing is just taking place “in our heads” – all the experiments and data that lead to it are indeed indirect. Of course there were crystallography and other techniques to illustrate structures of molecules, but again they were “in some way indirect.” “This means,” she continues that all the images produced to get an idea of how molecular structures look like are only “models.” One has to be aware of this when speaking about these images. This does not mean (she points out with special emphasis, as if she has to make sure not to be misunderstood) that everything visualized from data may look completely different – “certainly not.” In fact, there is a “two hundred year old debate” about whether such images represent the truth or are just deceptive. After all, it is also “a question of how to define the term ‘seeing’.” Although certainly not a new idea, the measuring instruments, when exactly calibrated, can well be understood as an “extension of our senses.” What is achieved with the help of instruments is “an expanded sense of ‘seeing’ in quotation marks.” It is as precise or imprecise “as our eyes or our senses,” she says and ends her statement asking “yes isn’t it?”, as if she wants to underline her conclusion. “Well,” she adds, “but also our senses can betray us.” Regine Hengge’s answer reminds me of how Burri described the inner contradictions of scholars when dealing with images: In der empirischen Analyse wurde evident, dass Ärzte und Wissenschaftler gegenüber den Bildern eine widersprüchliche Einstellung zeigen. Einerseits empfinden sie die Bilder als sehr ansprechend und wahrheitsgetreu und lassen sich von ihnen einnehmen, andererseits stehen sie ihnen auch kritisch gegenüber. (Burri 2008, 275)

Whereas Hannelore Hoch asserts that it takes context information to correctly draw an organism, Regine Hengge pleads to “critically trust” a combination of visualizations based on data and conceptual thinking. Both intend to visualize the invisible and make it understandable, but in both cases the careful examination of what becomes visible plays a prominent role. Both are concerned with the question of authenticity and are aware of the fact that visualization techniques and understanding are tightly connected. Biologist Gregor Hagedorn holds a different view. He reflects on where the invisible begins and which aspects escape the view. For him things are only invisible if they are completely inaccessible by visual means. To him something like “a ghost” is totally invisible, but this does not apply to the interior of an organism, which of course can be visualized by applying the right technique. What is more, images always show something originally invisible, even in the field of “diagrams or data.” The question of how an image can be understood is far more interesting to him. It undergoes changes from time to time and from observer to observer. In the case of the “false color representations of Eagle nebula” certainly all astrophysicists and “many other people that were interested only a little bit”

118 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

knew these colors did not represent reality. But a majority of the viewers probably was of the opinion that these images were shot with a regular camera and simply believed they were a reproduction of reality. They believed that we now have “this super telescope and with it scientists can suddenly take pictures that look that fascinating.” Moreover, he points out that there was certainly some sort of “blindness from routine” in the various fields and often people were not too deeply concerned about how their pictures were interpreted by others. A wildlife photographer would not add information about how he changed a background, because “this is what everybody does, this is common practice.” Ecologists may not understand this, and, based on their background they likely draw wrong conclusions. The problem occurs because different people simply have different concepts of dealing with images and in this “clash of cultures” is a problem, because this possibly leads to misunderstandings and to the falsification of information. The conditions under which an image is produced – an absolutely focal point – have to be transparent and must become part of the work routine. For morphologist Carola Becker, who studies marine organisms, it is the influence of water that comes to her mind when referring to aspects of the invisible. Often she takes pictures of the organisms in water and then she instantly runs into problems like clouding or reflections from the glass that obscure the view. Even when taking the organism out of the water its wet surface causes problems. It is possible to retouch this with Photoshop, but the water still remains the “invisible opponent.” Background is another problem. It is not originally “invisible,” she explains, but replacing the background helps to produce a clear contrast for the object. In an ideal case it is possible to “crop” the organism, but often she simply darkens the color of the background to generate an optimal visibility of the organism. For her practical work she is in favor of the color black – “all kinds of things are presented on black velvet to make them appear in a better light” – black is less confusing and a matt black does not reflect but absorbs the light so that the object is at the center of attention. This is of course not possible with dark organisms she says with a smile on her lips. Besides, using the same background as consequently as possible makes it easier to compare organisms. The presentation in front of a dark background can be regarded as a “disciplinary convention” and most of the researchers in her field observe this rule so that it has become standard practice. This convention, she adds, was established over time.

Summary Informants from biology share an appreciation for clear and readable images. The invisible symbolically represents the unknown and the unclear, – something that



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 119

obscures the view or is not unequivocally legible without doubts. At the same time image manipulations are pretty common in biology. In the laboratory organisms are systematically analyzed and recorded and even the way an organism is fixed under a microscope can already be considered a manipulation. From Hannelore Hoch’s and Carola Becker’s statements it becomes evident that approaching an organism is a gradual process in which the researcher’s view and actions have to be constantly reflected. There are a more things that can be learned from the informant’s statements. For example, biologists claim that it takes previous knowledge to produce and understand images correctly. The invisible is associated with hidden truths and insights that should be brought to light. This even applies to things that are too small to be spotted by the human eye. In this sense the invisible is regarded as a somehow problematic entity that must be visualized in order to gain knowledge. (Following a long tradition in which light is identified with knowledge and darkness with ignorance.) Even if images are visualized from data there still may be doubts as to whether they represent reality, which is kind of a dilemma as such images must be trusted. The credibility of an image largely depends on whether it shows something directly or indirectly, similar to a model derived by the application of sophisticated visualization techniques. Gregor Hagedorn recalls image producers who only pursue their own aims and manipulate images in such a way that other scholars misinterpret data. Consequently, understanding the information in images would require educated image producers as well as informed viewers and first of all an all-embracing and transparent documentation.

4.3.2 Activation Potential and Areas of Meaning: Design Perspectives Anouk Hoffmeister affirms that “naturally” the invisible plays a major role when communicating ideas through images. She goes on describing how she sometimes intentionally blends out things or how she only uses “some image element” to channel a discussion. Sometimes it is fully appropriate not to stress the possibility of data abuse, but to focus on “the positive and beneficial aspects” (of image manipulations). Technical aspects should as well not be overemphasized in the beginning of a presentation. Generally, it is seen as useful to add context and information to make what is not visible in a picture understandable. To explain aspects like “a viewing direction” sure is an instrument leading to a better understanding of the entire message. Images are not self-explanatory and the way in which they are presented influences whether the viewers trust or doubt the presented information, she claims, thus expressing her overall aim of convincing an audience through visual arguments.

120 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Designer Marc Tamschick cites sculptor Otto Herbert Hajek who once claimed he actually did not form a sculpture – not from stone, metal, wood or bronze, – he rather created “a void” by carving out material. Essentially it was the invisible that formed the sculpture. It is simply “what every one of us has in mind and carries around” which defines what can be seen and understood and sometimes that is more important than what is actually shown. Tamschick refers to a “classical movie scene” and explains, “a bicycle passes through a picture and cannot be seen anymore and then you hear the sound of the bicycle falling down.” What exactly happens is not visible, but still the viewer knows what has happened. This triggering of imaginations and anticipations is what deeply characterizes his work. It is all about evoking “images in the minds of the people” – for which all the instruments, the room, the music, time and dramaturgy are only a means to an end. He leans back in his chair and gazes out of the windows where the trees begin to blossom. “To make the invisible visible,” whispers designer Andreas Pinkow mysteriously. He admits it is not easy to characterize the invisible when the stage designs he creates are involved. Basically his work has been more about “mental images” and taking into account the invisible which he identifies as a conflict zone between images and artifacts. A communication process evolves through what is shown and the result is some space for the visitors to think (“einen Denkraum”), thus the visitors are “activated.” He then reports about an exhibition at Hygienemuseum, Dresden. There he transformed the exhibition halls into some sort of cruise ship with gilded corridors to make the subject of the exhibition “Wealth – more than enough” visible and tangible.40 He set up a wall there on which the passengers of a real cruise ship were asked before departure to draw three objects that they would take with them to a deserted island in case their ship sank. The result was “so crazy,” he remembers: It was so insane, because everybody started busily drawing these three objects and amateur drawings are always crazy and it was mad because this collection of hundreds of small drawings, put to that big wall all collected in some tableau representing our society – an effect we were not expecting.

The installation was crowned with success because it triggered imaginations and it became clear how hard it was to answer that question. The visitors were looking at this wall in the exhibition with pleasure (cf. Fig. 39) and wondered what someone had in mind, because it was not possible to tell the intentions somebody had when “drawing his wife, a book shelve or a curling iron.” This wall

40 http://dhmd.de/index.php?id=2174. Accessed: February 3, 2016.



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 121

covered all over with the wishes of people going on a cruise was supplemented with another wall exhibiting CDs with names of tax evaders and thus he intended to explain these “thematic and mental leaps” that must be established in order to create a conflict area.

Fig. 39: The “Sundeck-installation” in the exhibition “Wealth – more than enough” at the Hygienemuseum Dresden. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow, 2013.

That is what it was all about. One side represented what happened if money did not count any more and the other side showed a reality that was obsessed with money only. This moving back and forth between the layers of meaning plays a role as well when looking at images. Like Pinkow, Carola Zwick uses the phrase, “to make the invisible visible.” For her the invisible is an instrument in order to test ideas and assumptions and to “overcome illusions” – illusions that can come up in the process of product development – and such products have a clearly defined purpose. The objects she and her team create are no “dust collectors,” but “agents” in the sense that they provoke – meaning things that require some form of interaction. As a consequence an invisible area of meaning unfolds around these things, which has to be examined accurately. The aim is to change the relation between object and user, she points out with much emphasis. Her team does not produce “furniture,” but tools for the user, which surely makes a crucial difference. There is a hidden “plan for action” inherent in such objects and images are needed to document this plan. She and her team formulate mission statements

122 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

sometimes about 100 pages long to explain the functionality of an object in detail and to show which assumptions and hypotheses have led to certain results.

Fig. 40: Creating the workspace of the future: the Metaform Portfolio by 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller.

With their development of office-equipment Carola Zwick’s team intends to find answers to the profound changes in the working culture and the rise of the “knowledge worker.” Similar to the master builders of cathedrals in the Middle Ages even today’s “knowledge workers” carry around their own tools (referring to their mobile computers), she states. Therefore it is an absolute must to study how technologies and mentalities are in constant change and how the requirements for a workspace of the future undergo dramatic changes. (cf. Fig. 40) We compared this with a kiosk, meaning the desktop of a computer and a physical kiosk – all these are spaces in which the information is located in some defined spot. To analyze this and to filter and to again and again explain this to other people helps to reflect the process of how we start and how we evaluate our work and how we take the right decisions in every single detail.

Summary There is a tendency among the informants from the field of design to perceive the invisible as a tool or resource that opens up efficient ways of addressing an audience. The invisible represents areas of meaning that must be examined and documented



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 123

(Carola Zwick) or symbolizes a conflict area that has a potential to activate and generate a form of added value (Pinkow). It is as if some of the designers instantly and without conscious thinking consider entering the backdoor to people’s minds. Marc Tamschick deems the invisible to be a form of embodied and subconscious knowledge that is more important than what is actually visible. The invisible in this sense is a force that triggers imaginations and can be used to achieve effects. Interaction designer Anouk Hoffmeister demands to blend out aspects in presentations that may confuse the viewers. In her eyes less sometimes is more with regard to adequate communication. Andreas Pinkow explains how thematic jumps or jumps in scale can produce attention and help to activate people. All in all, the invisible is seen as a force that can be used, an instrument that produces meaning and makes people use their power of reason and imagination.

4.3.3 “Intertwined Poles” – Curatorial and Art Historical Perspectives Whereas most of the designers relate to their work when reflecting how the invisible shapes their work with images, art historians show a tendency to automatically relate to a distant past. The invisible plays a special role, Horst Bredekamp elaborates, because it shows not only the boundaries of the image but also its potential to visualize. “The amazing thing” is that the invisible strives to “become an image.” Until 1619 or 1620, Bredekamp explains, the world of miniscule structures remained invisible and only after Robert Hooke published his great book Micrographia, from 1665 onwards the world of the invisible was transformed into “a grandiosity of display” gaining a “quality of fascination” that was completely unknown before. By using terms like “surprise” and “fascinating aspects” he verbally underlines the revolutionary break-through of the visual and diagnoses an analogy between the false color pictures from the “Hubble telescope” and these early technical visualizations. The images from the telescope were “styled” in a way that even if “nobody knew the true colors” they appeared like paintings. But also objects in more abstract fields such as quantum physics have a tendency to turn into images, which is the case with the so-called “Schrodinger cat.”41 “There is this amazing phenomenon,” Bredekamp points out, that “the invisible shows 41 In 1935 physicist Erwin Schrödinger created a thought experiment in which he imagined a cat inside a box together with an apparatus that – depending on the decay of an atomic nucleus within an hour – would smash a vial with hydrocyanic acid that would then kill the cat. Since the decay of an atomic nucleus happens only under “certain likelihood,” the cat in this model system would be at the same time alive and dead (as long as nobody opened the box to check). With the same likelihood the decay of the nucleus would release the apparatus or not. Schrödinger thereby visualized a process per definition invisible to the human eye.

124 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

the limits of the visible, but at the same time the limits of the invisible. The invisible aims (Orig. “dahin drängen”) at becoming visible,” he concludes. Bodo Baumunk points out in a mocking tone, “the more complex a subject you want to show in an exhibition is, the more remains invisible.” We sit in an almost empty restaurant on the campus of Humboldt University. Baumunk leans back in his chair and looks at me with his dark and vibrant eyes. The camera on the table does not bother him, he mentions, and during the conversation he looks at the lens again and again as if there is an invisible hidden counterpart. While speaking he keeps a constant smile on his face and looks as if he is amused by something or as if he is in a state of mental turmoil. The message of an exhibition can be compared to an iceberg, he describes, and only the tip is visible and can thereby be shown through images. He thinks for a moment and bends his head. For the overall composition of an exhibition it is most significant that the invisible part does not vanish completely. The invisible element can for example be supplemented by an audible element and by letting “whatever people tell whatever.” For the exhibition “Kosher and Co.” which he organized for the Jewish Museum Berlin he created an entrée that explains dietary laws by presenting stuffed animals. In Jewish tradition, he reports without further explaining the exact contexts, dietary laws were in a complicated way connected to the history of creation and one may translate these laws as some sort of biblical “species identification.” (Orig. “Artenkunde”) He pauses and stares at the ceiling. Then he looks at me saying that there, (meaning: in the Old Testament) the criteria for defining an animal as kosher or non-kosher are all listed. Making these invisible contexts understandable he has set up some sort of “biblical museum of natural history” with “as many split hooves and non-split hooves as possible.” There is a friendly smile around his face, as if we have shared a good joke. Of course, there are dietary laws that cannot directly be explained only through hooves, he says – giving the example of the “story with the sinew.”42 But the invisible as an abstraction certainly does not deprive him of his night’s sleep, “not in the least,” he points out, stressing his words as if he wants to wrap up this subject once and for all. One should not let this gain control, he adds. Many things can be invisible in her understanding, art historian and member of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory Angela Boesl reports; and thus of course it is a relevant factor. Angela holds her hands in front of her, her wrists slightly bent while sitting on one of the comfortable swivel chairs that are placed in all

42 Observant Jews do not eat the sciatic nerve in remembrance of Jacob’s legendary wrestling with the angel (cf. Genesis 32: 25–33).



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 125

project rooms of the laboratory. It is about half past nine in the morning. She does not picture the artist, the creator of a work of art, because he is the “invisible dimension behind art.” What “drives scientific imaging” is that the image is “affirmative and that it cannot reflect itself, at least not in one picture.” At the point of “the selection” it becomes obvious how the invisible and the visible are implicitly intertwined. Art can make itself invisible in a way, she claims, playing with her necklace. She continues to explain how she understands this form of invisibility. Paintings may lose information through the change of pigments over time. Elements may be wiped out as a result of “restoration” or may be “cropped off.” Thus important information is lost. She has to analyze the work of art itself to “see what the creation tells” her. There are “unbelievably fantastic technical options” today to manage this she emphatically points out. It is for example possible to look below the layers of paint by using “infrared reflectography” in order to reveal hidden information in paintings. “I sometimes find it exciting when finally something invisible becomes visible,” she adds. In the National Gallery in London there is an image of Goya, – the portrait of a lady, – a painting whose pigments have changed over time so that an earlier painting underneath became visible – it “revealed itself.” In so far the invisible sometimes claims its due right, she adds meaningfully. When examining very complex works the production history must be analyzed by taking into consideration the underlying drawing, – such invisible information is very useful in an art history research examination. “In order to make the invisible visible” one has to check many sources and contexts as well as information regarding the artist. “Yes,” she summarizes, “this is what really defines the invisible and in this respect it is absolutely relevant.” For curator Theresia Ziehe the invisible represents something that is not visible, such as texts, or something that is not yet visualized, but is “somehow in the air.” Despite all options to explain the visual through words she is in favor of an approach that “something has to remain open for the viewer.” There is something in an image that may be understood in many different ways. Fantastic about images is that they are “multifaceted,” she points out and reaches for a glass of white wine from the table in front of her. I know Theresia well from work at the Jewish Museum (there we used to be colleagues) and this is why we have decided to choose a less formal way of meeting in a coffee house right after work. A wooden bar is located in the middle of the room and there are many pictures on all walls. In her eyes, the interpretation of images has to remain open at least to a certain extent – otherwise their basic function is destroyed. Despite all attempts to verbally describe and define art it is not clear if what is actually said about a work is congruent with the artist’s intentions, there always remains a chance that in the end the artist means something completely different.

126 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Summary In conclusion, for art historians who devote their work to the analysis of artifacts, it is important to analyze and understand images in as many dimensions as possible. Image producing techniques play a role as well as historical contexts, material damages or the intentions and biographical details of the artists. What is visible and what remains invisible thus produces a noteworthy field of tension and becomes the object of research itself. Horst Bredekamp explains that the invisible shows an inherent tendency to become visible, while Angela Boesl sees images as complex objects that should be carefully analyzed and described in many detail. Baumunk focuses on the space of meaning that unfolds around an artwork or among objects in exhibitions as an instrument that has to be carefully reflected. He sees a potential in the invisible that always has to be taken into account. At the same time he refers to the limits of what images can express and thinks that the more complex a subject is the more of it remains invisible. Boesl points out that the invisible comes into play wherever the information in images is hidden or lost and that this plays a significant role for the art historian’s research. According to Theresia Ziehe it is illegitimate to interpret images up to the final detail because thereby a special capacity of images is destroyed. The invisible supports the message of an exhibition, its essence and the discourse of questions and answers that are tightly connected to the artifacts. Something is planted into the minds of the audience to grow and further develop there. Below this “tip of the iceberg,” to put it in Bodo Baumunk’s words, unfolds the invisible as a powerful instrument for curators to offer perspectives and produce resonance.

4.3.4 Data, Gaming and Cropped Images in Computer Science Andreas Lange sees the invisible closely linked to the experience of gaming itself. His museum has preserved the hardware and the software of computer games from recent decades and its intention is to keep them accessible or to emulate them for future generations so that the atmosphere of the games, the situations and interactions in games can be experienced. “The problem is,” says Lange, “the visitors cannot really explore ‘the gameplay’,” unless games are exhibited in an interactive way. Only the gamers themselves are familiar with this experience. Lange, a slim middle-aged man is not a trained computer scientist (he majored in Religious and Theatre Studies), but has been – as he claims – preoccupied with “this topic” for long. In the eighties and nineties people interpreted computer games mainly as a pure visual medium (Orig. “Bildmedium”) and “judged computer games harshly” and thereby caused “a big misunderstanding.” People’s opinions of games often



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 127

resulted from a “view over their shoulder.” They saw how gamers played an “EgoShooter” game (Orig. “ein Ballerspiel”) and asked “what horrible a movie is this?” In the meanwhile perspectives have changed and when evaluating a game today the playing of a game definitely plays a role. But it has not really been possible to make the experience of playing computer games understandable even through photography. Of course pictures of emotional reactions that are triggered when playing a game are very popular for advertisement purposes (cf. Fig. 41) – but the normal position when playing a game in front of a screen is “tense concentration” and it can hardly be shown in photographs how this activity can very well be “a lot of fun.” As he goes into detail it seems as if he just realizes the significance of the gaming experience. It is “an essential component of our subject” and therefore “very important” to transform this into “the minds of our visitors.” Of course there are artists working on this aspect and they are trying to visualize the gaming experience on a split screen, but such approaches have never been exhibited in the Museum of Computer Games so far. There is a lot of research carried out in regard to this topic, he says, but “some motivation curves” or “EEG-stories” or “some assumptions concerning the release of hormones” are not “really appropriate” for an exhibition. It is more interesting to show the “human side,” like facial expressions and body language or other such things.

Fig. 41: WipEout HD 3D (Sony Computer Entertainment, 2010) at the Museum of Computer Games. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of Computer Games, Berlin.

128 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

“The invisible,” Christian Stein says in a strong and imperturbable voice and without hesitation, “there are two forms of the invisible: first, there is ‘the irrelevant’ and second there is what has not yet been made visible.” For him, the irrelevant should better be erased: My thoughts are always subjective, biased and selective and in that sense I want to put things in order. What I want to consider irrelevant I want to make invisible and on the other hand I want to make things visible which I consider relevant.43

In his world this works with data or when modeling structures. They are more or less appropriate for visualizing things. He pauses for a moment and then adds, “this may sound a little abstract.” He thinks of an example and refers to a random photo in which the invisible represents the context of the situation – time, person, place, which normally are invisible, but “significantly influence” the “specific configuration” of the picture. If the origins of a picture are relevant for the understanding he tries to “visualize the invisible” and to find out the contexts that constitute the “framework” for understanding the picture. If only parts of the picture are relevant he crops this part and ignores the rest. Computer scientist Alexander Struck gives an even more condensed answer. He documents what is visible, he slowly says and sometimes he does this by “adding threshold values.” Some aspects he deliberately leaves out or he moves them to the invisible sector entirely. He stops abruptly as if he wants to say, “Okay, that’s it, let us proceed.”

Summary Museum professional Lange expresses the desire to make certain invisible aspects visible, like the experience of gameplay, but is aware of clear limitations. To his mind experiences cannot be mediated only through static images, while Christian Stein and Alexander Struck associate the invisible with irrelevant information that should better be cropped or deleted. What is visualized consequently must be relevant and represent data adequately. From their perspective there is no doubt that the information in images is fully controllable and that it is the scholar who is in charge of taking appropriate decisions of how to visualize something and what to visualize.

43 Interview on April 4, 2014.



4.3 Approaching the Invisible 

 129

4.3.5 Conclusions Merriam Webster’s online dictionary defines “invisible” as, “Incapable by nature of being seen.”44 Though this definition appears to be sufficiently clear it does not explain how the visible and the invisible complement or relate to each other. However, for most of the informants it seems to be out of the question that the invisible plays a major role for how images convey information, how they produce meaning and knowledge. A lot of information can be gained from how the informants understand the term. For example, some of the biologists claim that it requires expertise and previous knowledge to produce and understand images correctly. The invisible is associated with hidden truths and insights that should be brought to light, or with things that are too small to be recognized by the human eye. In that sense the invisible is at least partly considered a problematic entity. What is invisible must be visualized in order to release and expose hidden information. It was in this sense that Philipp Stoellger claimed, “Was ist, muss sichtbar sein, gezeigt werden können, sonst ist es nicht.” (Stoellger 2014, 5) Nonetheless, Hagedorn is sure that there are image producers who only see their own aims and manipulate images in such a way that scholars from other fields misinterpret the data (for example wild life photographers). In consequence, appropriate image work requires both, skillful image producers who document all the manipulations, and educated viewers who know how to interpret a certain imaging technique. In many of the statements and comments of the informants from the field of biology there is a tendency to identify the invisible with factors that confuse or obscure visual data. Even informants from other fields associate the invisible with the limits of knowledge. Angela Boesl claims that there always is a limit to what can be understood in images and that something always escapes scholarly attention. Horst Bredekamp stresses that visualization techniques fundamentally changed how the world is perceived, but expresses his opinion that the invisible and the visible are inseparably linked. Theresia Ziehe expresses a similar idea when claiming that every piece of art has its invisible share, something that should not be translated into words. Looking at what is not visible obviously makes people think of the limits of knowledge. At the same time the informants realize that there is no objective perspective when analyzing images, but that the individual standpoint of the viewer deeply influences the understanding of images. Marc Tamschick and Andreas Pinkow identify the invisible with imagination and images that only exist in the

44 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invisible. Accessed: February 3, 2016.

130 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

minds of the audience. The invisible is portrayed as a powerful instrument in the hands of stage designers. Both describe the invisible as a tool that can be adapted to their needs, something that can be used to trigger imaginations and has a special potential to bring light to new ideas and inspirations. Key terms mentioned are “associations,” “fields of meaning,” or “resonance.” In sum, reflecting upon the invisible reveals some of the aspects scholars consider essential for the process of visual knowledge production: images carry an invisible share, the understanding of images requires previous knowledge and there is an agency in images that aims at becoming visible, to only emphasize few of the mentioned associations.

4.4 Purposes and Practices Reflecting upon the invisible or hidden aspects with regard to images many of the informants were drawn to the more practical side of image work. Images are powerful instruments to achieve certain goals – this is true for scholarly images as well as for images in the media, politics or art. At the same time understanding how images are produced and processed requires a close examination of the purposes they serve. Images for a presentation may be prepared differently than images for publication purposes. Again, this aspect is non-trivial insofar as images can serve more than one purpose at a time. For example, scholarly images can be used for analysis, for presentations and publications, for comparisons – in order to teach or convince, to explain or advertise – to only name a few. But to what extent does a certain purpose shape the use of images or the logics that play a role in manipulating images? Of course massive manipulations can profoundly change the way images are perceived and understood and they can affect the interpretation of images. But even smaller changes in size or color can have an impact on how visual information is perceived. Another purpose-related aspect is that scholarly images used for representation are often selected out of a vast number of images, but it has been claimed that rather than the isolated image it is a sequence of images that best represents the outcome of research: Of course, as soon as scientists leave their laboratories, they fall back on the commonsense version of science as the mirror image of the world. They are suddenly more than happy to display one isolated image extracted out of the chains as “the definitive proof” of the phenomenon they wish to describe. Then, but only then, and only for pedagogical or publication relation purposes, are we asked to see one image as the copy of one phenomenon. But no matter how convincing this display might seem, other practitioners know full well that in order to judge the quality of such an isolated image, one should not try to compare it to its



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 131

“model” out there, but should check what it has retained from another inscription, before, and what it can send to another inscription, after. (Latour 2014, 349)

Another aspect that affects the understanding of images and that plays a role for the following section is the complex relation between producer and viewer (Frow 2012). Being well aware of the relevance of such aspects, this study examines the extent to which the informants’ purposes shape their rationality in producing and manipulating images and it aims at finding adequate ways of explaining scholarly behavior. In the course of the conversations some of the purposes scholars associate with the use of images were revealed and it became evident that many scholars are well aware of how they calibrate their instruments to achieve intended purposes. Informants of course share more than only one purpose and that is why some informants will be cited in more than one section. People use all kinds of techniques and tools to produce images, not all of them digital. Some practices even have a long tradition that goes way back in the history of mankind and may indeed be as old as the cave paintings in Lascaux.

4.4.1 “Thinking with the Hands” One of such practices is hand drawing. It makes a profound difference for people if they work on screens or with pen and paper. From what I learned from the informants I got the impression as if the physical activity is connected to a deeper, bodily form of understanding. A number of informants describe that drawings play a role in developing ideas, in producing concepts or designing drafts. Hannelore Hoch’s use of drawings has been pointed out above (cf. section 4.1.2). There are also other informants who explained how important this practice is for their work. For Horst Bredekamp the “ongoing drawing of mental diagrams” (“Denkdiagramme”) is an important tool for structuring his thoughts as well. Ideas “often originate in intuition in a disorderly form” and he has to bring them “into a sequential order.” He starts by writing down terms, which “usually are linked to autonomous, atomistic ideas” and combines them with “lines, ladders or stars.” On the basis of this system of combinations he then develops a scheme in which he works with acronyms or codes. When having finished these preparatory steps, he starts writing. He has “preached” his doctoral students this technique over and over again, he points out and sighs. One always needs a structure with “visual power” in order to get started, he stresses and adds, that it is a “most urgent wish to have a structure” with a clear geometry that appears to be “marbled” (“marmoriert”).

132 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 42: Concept Sketch (Scan). Christian Stein, 2014.

Similar to Horst Bredekamp computer scientist Christian Stein believes that drawing is not only a means of communication but also “a means of thinking in itself.” Christian generally uses software tools to visualize data. For presentations he uses PowerPoint or Keynote and “only recently” he included Illustrator or Photoshop and tools for the visualization of diagrams, like VUE (Visual Understanding Environment). In the past he worked with “native UML-Tools” (“Unified Modeling Language Tools”) but “at the moment” he does not do so, he adds and pauses for a moment to let his words sink in. Then he continues to describe how he frequently works with pen and paper to sketch certain problems or to visualize the structure of projects. (cf. Fig. 42) He normally first draws a diagram of what he has planned to code later on. This is an essential step to reflect his ideas, an effective way to get an impression of the overall architecture he has been anticipating. But, he asserts, these drawings on paper only play a supportive role as mind maps. Alexander Struck uses almost the same words to confirm that he needs drawings and sketches “as tools to sort out and develop ideas.” When I first ask him it seems as if he cannot think of any situation in which images have played a role



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 133

for his work at all. When gazing at the large white board in the middle of his room with its writings and drawings he suddenly realizes the relevance of hand drawn sketches. He explains his “system of mental organization” in great detail. The board with additional wings similar to one in a classroom appears large in relation to the size of the room and on it there are formulas and models of network structures that remain incomprehensible to the uninitiated outsider. Drawings help him to “get a better understand of complex contexts” (cf. Fig. 43) and to check whether he has considered every detail in analyzing a certain graph (“Netzwerkstruktur”).

Fig. 43: Sketch for network graph by Alexander Struck. Photograph TB, 2015.

The image shows the concept of a citation graph. Alexander explained that he planned the graph in order to visualize possible relations among “knots” (representing scholarly articles). The image supports the programming and helps to check whether all relevant cases are represented. In the center the blue knots (articles) symbolize connected citations, the direction arrows in red are placeholders for cited articles, the green ones relate to articles being the source of a citation.

134 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

His way of taking notes develops accidentally and every now and then he deletes aspects or adds others, if necessary. He uses the same symbols and colors to differentiate and keep everything in order. Most of this remains on the board for long, he asserts, drumming his fingers on the table.

Fig. 44: Concept Sketch: “Vision – Emotion – Tradition” (Scan). Andreas Pinkow.

The work of stage designer Andreas Pinkow often starts “on a conceptual level.” At this point he starts with “four or five areas,” but then his work is about “narrowing down the problem.” (cf. Fig. 44) Therefore he uses diverse forms of drawings depending on the subject matter. Sometimes he draws schemes diagrams, principles, dimensions or contrasts or every once in a while he even starts with the architecture of a room itself. He smiles while talking vividly and then suddenly appears a little lost in thought. “The mystery of creativity” lies therein he says as he describes the process. He actually feels as if “his hand (was) guiding.” Not only in drawing schemes, but also when drawing “spatial solutions” (cf. Figs. 45 – 47), “(his) hand is thinking” which is “most fulfilling and most exciting.” The original drawing that marks the beginning of a certain development process “eventually vanishes” at some point. Then it is scanned and maybe used in presentations but afterwards it simply “doesn’t matter any more.”



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 135

Figs. 45–47: Sketches of the Urban Planet Pavilion, EXPO 2010. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow.

136 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

To him it is always surprising to see how a drawing is able to explain the basic idea of a creation better than many words or very detailed renderings. As the drawing represents “the hand” of the author it causes a very unique effect. Everybody knows how “tricky three-dimensional rendering programs” are but nonetheless “the very essence of an idea” can best be represented in a drawing. He laughs and shakes his head. What is amazing is that people want to possess original drawings, he explains. Somehow people identify the drawing with the concept of “the original,” he specifies.

Fig. 48: Design elements of a development cycle from 7.5 studios: presentation on open house day of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on June 8, 2013. Photograph TB.

If one has to evaluate the development of a product and wants to test whether something works out in reality the hands often are powerful instruments (“the hand knows much faster”), Carola Zwick claims. She explains how it makes sense to draw flow charts or sketches if one intends to characterize an ecosystem, or to develop aspects relating to “some hypothesis,” or simply to communicate with others. Such drawings, she ascertains, have a “half-life period” of about 20



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 137

minutes and their only purpose is to support communication, because language is “very imprecise.” She jumps out of her chair, crosses the room and returns with on object in her hands – a 3D-sketch (made of molded foam), as she points out, which has been produced to merge the idea of a bicycle seat with the idea of a horse saddle. She and her colleagues are working on the further development of the Scooter (an office chair developed by 7.5 studios) and she instantly has the idea to “morph” (Orig. English) these two concepts. As this was a rather complicated task she therefore produced this piece of work in less then 20 minutes on the grinding machine with her own hands and then asked a colleague to build a 3D-model out of it. This is a simple and fast kind of workflow. She pauses a moment and then points out that drawing is actually of little relevance in her work. It is mostly 3D-visualizations or even better models that show whether an idea works out or not. “Every now and then a sketch can help to show if a concept is still fuzzy” and thereby help to “visualize the degree of penetration” (“Durchdringung”) which is rather the exception than the rule she concedes. Carola Zwick’s work includes a lot of developing and testing, which requires thinking in the 3rd dimension, a quality that two-dimensional drawings simply cannot provide.

Fig. 49: Mirra Chair by 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller.

138 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

She talks about how one of the chairs (Mirra) she developed was included in a museum’s collection (Neue Sammlung München). She was asked for drawings to document the development of this product. (cf. Figs. 48 & 49) Of course, she smiles; they had a project documentation of about 1000 pages, but no drawings at all because drawings simply played no role in the process. Because the curators were so eager to include drawings in their collection, she simply asked a colleague to produce them ex post facto – in other words – to “fake” (Orig. Engl.) them: She (Carola Zwick’s colleague) sat down and drew sketches because they so badly wanted them. We couldn’t explain to them why we had no sketches.45

Although for Carola Zwick drawings are not at the center of her work, she eloquently explains their special quality. Drawings possess “a liveliness in stroke” and “in the ductus” that leaves “space for the imagination.” As they offer “room for interpretation” one can effectively use them as a medium. But as a means for design drafts, she remarks, drawings are of little relevance. The same is true for renderings, which she only produces occasionally. She uses a program called StrataVision for renderings, because this program has the “most beautiful algorithms for calculating the ray of lights” and the results do not look like “a place after dropping a neutron bomb.”

Summary The informants’ use of drawings can broadly be divided into two main categories: first, those who use drawings to visualize and organize ideas and concepts, hierarchies, networks and structures. Second, those who see drawings as a form of intuitive expression, a form of bodily knowledge in which the hand itself is thinking and generating results. Drawings can be regarded as or considered a most intuitive form of visual expression; ideas and intentions are immediately put into effect. It is an unrestricted and informal way of expressing which is very often referred to as a draft and not as a final product of research. Hannelore Hoch’s drawings (cf. Fig. 50) are of a different kind, because they represent her observations of organisms – they document and explain at the same time. For these drawings she uses a clearly defined set of different lines and dots to code the function and the location of organismic structures. Her drawings are at the same time representations and interpretations of the observed. However, it is worth mentioning that all of the informants highly value drawings because of their potential to connect the mind and the hand which makes improvising easy – in many cases even without any expert skills.

45 Interview on June 6, 2014.



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 139

Fig. 50: Goniobenna hypermedusa. Drawings of the genital tract of a cicada. Drawn with the help of a Camera lucida, Hannelore Hoch, 2006/2007.

140 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

4.4.2 Documentation and Representation It is not surprising whatsoever museum professionals highlight the value of images for the means of documentation. Accordingly, Andreas Lange explains and specifies that images in exhibitions normally must have “something typical.” He cites the example of the “milestone wall” (cf. Fig. 51) in the Museum of Computer Games and points out that it not only serves as “a certain form of introduction” to make the game recognizable as such but also as a typical game sequence through which the audience gets an overall idea of the dynamics of the game.

Fig. 51: Computer Game Milestones at Museum of Computer Games, Berlin. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of Computer Games.

Images are used to document the collection, for example the boxes of computer games. They are scanned and stored in the inventory system. He points out that in order to preserve the special attraction of a game for future generations it is necessary to record scenes from playing the game (cf. Fig. 52), especially from multi player online games, to make for example “the great battles in World of Warcraft” visible – because this is the only way to keep “game settings that include social interactions accessible” and understandable 50 to 60 years from now.



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 141

Fig. 52: Game sequence from World of Warcraft. Screenshot by Jan-Ole Christian, 2007.

Even if it were possible to keep the game technically accessible, he specifies, one could not assume that the social dynamics were the same. Images in this case are “an adequate medium” to preserve an impression of the interactions that characterize such a “multi-player online game” – since images are essentially what today’s gamers are looking at. Lange also clarifies the limits of images for preserving the visual impression of computer games: images in computer games are much more than only a visual stimulus, he explains. A central element of the game experience is sound – without this “important image information” one is not able to understand the experience at all. Jürgen Feige uses images to provide “representations of objects.” This is what museum work is all about, he generalizes, and it is not “about effects and not about staging.” He leans back in his swivel chair and puts his hands behind his neck. The University of Applied Arts and Sciences has been in possession of “a collection of historical glass negatives,” he reports which originated in the 19th century, and documented fashion photography (cf. Fig. 53). This collection is used to teach students how to professionally photograph objects.

142 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 53: Documentary photography: Fashion 1921. Alice Hechy. “Bell Dress.” ­Photograph Dr. Franz Stoedtner, Berlin. University of Applied Arts and Sciences Berlin, after 1921. FB 5. Historical Archive: from the textbook collection of the state school of weaving. Inventory No.: CC-BY-SA 4.0.

He pauses for a moment and adds that the task of representing something visually in an authentic way is absolutely non-trivial. The first challenge is to correctly represent the dimensions of an object. Of course it is technically possible to document in the original size (producing a photograph of the same size as the original object), but nobody does this. However, it becomes visible that the pedagogic aspect of documentary photography plays a central role for his work. Every single detail has to be registered, all the information about the author or the material have to be preserved together with an image. In short, it is important to examine and to document museum objects in a very systematic way. It has been possible for him to control image manipulations when working “with (his) computer,” but if others send him pictures or bring them along as



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 143

print out versions it gets more complicated. Under certain circumstances the problem of detecting image manipulations implies a technological dimension. It appears as if it is easier for him to speak about the practical aspects of image manipulation than about image as an abstract term.

Fig. 54: The pedagogic aspect of image work: Student exhibition at University of Applied Arts and Sciences, Berlin. Photograph TB, 2014.

In such cases, he is hardly able to follow up on any of the manipulations, he says and adds another aspect to an already complex tableau. Then he reports about an exhibition project in Oderberg, for the “Museum of Inland Shipping,” for which he produced a “hands-on” photo album and simulated the “auratic” force of the original by using “real photo paper.” This way he could simulate the “entire charm of a photo album.” Of course, he thoughtfully adds, it was not his aim to deceive visitors by leaving them under the impression that they were facing an original, but still it was indeed easy to make a reproduction appear like an authentic object. Such manipulations “in the end” caused “ethical issues” and of course it was not okay to do so, he mindfully points out.

144 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Summary Documentary photography is a well-established instrument to collect and organize information in museum collections. Such images are crucial for retrieving information from a museum database and for providing a representation of the original object. But even if the documentation includes all the information available about an artifact, the informants claim there is certainly a limit to what can be preserved through still photography. Images can only be understood in their historical or social contexts and especially information like movement or sound in computer games can by no means accurately be preserved through still images. Again, this reminds of Latour’s reservation that “one image” cannot adequately represent the outcome of scholarly research. Moreover, like Feige claims, a photograph (no matter whether analog or digital) cannot represent an object in all its dimensions. Informants emphasize the difference between the physical appearance of museum artifacts and their photographic representation. The image thus represents an attempt to capture as many of the dimensions of the artifact as possible, but naturally there are limits to what can be represented.

4.4.3 Comparison and Analysis In biology, like in other fields, producing research questions and formulating hypotheses are often closely related to the systematic comparison of images. Biologist Friederike Saxe explains that she produces representative images for her publications through “the stacking of images” and by applying “reasonable statistics.” In her work she has gained images from “spinning disc microscopy” that allow her to observe living cells and genetically modified and fluorescent cellular components in action over a period of time. Her focus mainly is on cellulose-synthase-complexes located inside a cell membrane, which are transported through the membrane to build up cell walls. In order to produce representative images from the resulting video sequences (for publications or presentations) she sometimes chooses a single representative picture from out “of a video” that documents the experiment. (In a later conversation Friederike underlines that she would consider it inappropriate and deem it as a form of manipulation if she only chose isolated images that best matched her results.) Apart from that, certain manipulations are possible, like applying a certain color code, but this must happen in a very controlled manner and in accordance with defined rules, without affecting the interpretation, she adds. From her words it becomes clear that one of her defining aims is to generate images



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 145

that consistently represent the data, rather than some subjective view of the individual scholar. At the same time Friederike is aware of the fact that even when images are produced on a statistical basis subjective decisions still play a role and not all of the complex information recorded in a video can be represented in one image only. “Producing an orderly sequence out of chaos” is what curator Bodo Baumunk regards as his main purpose when working with images. He uses images in his work mainly “to compose” exhibitions. Working with card files might appear somehow odd and archaic in our times, he claims, and indeed nowadays they do not really help with the organization of data. But no matter how the objects are handled, if one “indeed composes an exhibition” the images “start talking.” In this process, he explains, it is crucial to spread out “the pictorial evidence” (Orig. “das Bildgut”) at least once, “or several times on a large table” to understand their totality and to get an impression of how the objects interact with each other. This is impossible on a computer screen, maybe it may work with a computer projector, he reflects, but he does not consider this a “good system.” Theresia Ziehe holds a similar view but sometimes she works with digital images (in addition to paper mock-ups) to simulate and anticipate the spatial dimensions of a final presentation. (cf. Figs. 55 – 58) Basically she uses images for organizing exhibitions at the Jewish Museum Berlin. With a light smile on her lips she reports about one of her latest photo exhibitions in which she showed the works of Fred Stein. She planned to present “portraits of celebrities” in the form of a “Petersburg hanging” there. She tested this form of staging with the help of “a digital visualization tool” (“digitale Wandabwicklung”) and was surprised to learn that “the images in her head” were not congruent with her expectations in reality.

146 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 55–58: Digital visualization tool. Theresia Ziehe, 2014.



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 147

She intended to generate an impression of opulence and confusion, but realized that this effect could only be achieved with images in different frames. (In the museum all frames are of the same type.) The designer that assisted her in this project tried to simulate the desired chaos as best as he could, but the effect was just “ridiculous.” Such an example demonstrates how important it is to define and to test in advance how one wants to display the artifacts in an exhibition. Horst Bredekamp explains that his work is all about comparing images “over and over again.” It takes a great number of pictures, a vast number of motifs, ideally in form of “excellently printed images” to compare them in a “more physical way” than with digital images on screen. Naturally digital images in high resolution have advantages of their own because it is possible to zoom into the deep structures of the image, but when working with prints, it is easier to spread them out on a table. “If this is just successful, there is nothing like it,” he emphatically underscores his argument. Most of the time such conditions are not available, since it is quite expensive to have a room large enough that fulfills all necessary requirements. Census is for him an important instrument for image comparisons46, but he also uses images from the Prometheus platform47 or from the Google image search tool. The latter is “amazing in its desolate disorder” but he has experienced positive as well as negative surprises. Some of the classifications are either fascinating or simply “senseless.” This wild association is surprising – often very beautiful, but sometimes also annoying because of the senselessness in which the algorithm selects and combines the images.48

He usually acquires excellent images from webpages of museums but sometimes it takes considerable efforts to get hold of such pictures. For example, it took him six months and cost him a lot of nerves to get an image of a stone axe from West Tofts that he used for his research. Art historian Angela Boesl similarly characterizes her analytical work with images. She assembles “entire tableaus” to examine whether a certain order or relationship can be proven, or whether there are deviations to be detected among a series of similar motifs. It is not always possible for her to work with images in excellent quality and sometimes even the quality of her printer poses a limitation to the process of comparing. Despite such obstacles she tries to work with images, which are not significantly different in quality and size. Sometimes she

46 www.census.de 47 www.prometheus-bildarchiv.de 48 Interview on April 23, 2014.

148 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

simply opens an image on screen to see “how do they do this, how do they work this out, which photographic reproduction techniques were applied, how was something drawn and what has been drawn.” Sometimes she compares digital to analog images in order to have an additional source of information. There are always variations detectable in diverse media, she points out so that she sometimes can only guess that in a certain image there is a “yellowish tint,” or “there is a rather reddish one,” or the monitor resolution affects what is visible. This “again is such a question,” Angela explains pensively and stresses that it is simply not possible for her to go and compare the image with the original whenever she wants to.

Summary Analyzing images as research objects requires not only images in good quality, but also an educated viewer who is able to trace information and to compare images in a disciplined manner. As Bredekamp and Boesl point out, pragmatic aspects play a role in this process and can affect the way images on the table or on the screen are perceived. Both are familiar with factors that can influence one’s judgment or produce misperceptions. Interestingly, such risk factors cannot always be eliminated and in the eyes of the art historians it is the judgment of the individual researcher that has to be trusted. The scholar has to decide whether an image represents the original accurately or to what extent colors and temperature or image resolution affect the sighting even without a direct comparison with the original. A good amount of uncertainty is always inherent when comparing images and it is the professional view of the researcher that must deal with it. Curators use images to test certain effects and to simulate exhibitions in the form of mock-ups or models. Through this process of testing, unwanted effects can be identified and avoided or eliminated, like Theresia Ziehe explained. Comparing images is a way of reflecting the quality of objects that have been selected for display and furthermore it allows anticipating resonances that a certain configuration of objects may eventually produce. According to Saxe something in the form of an ethical struggle on the part of the researcher can be experienced at the point in time when the selection process takes place and a decision has to be made with regard to which images represent the data best and which ones have the most valuable (and appealing) information. But Saxe does not view this as a dilemma, but much more as a process in which the individual researcher has to act ethically and responsibly.



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 149

4.4.4 Communication Aids As outlined in the introduction communication processes in many respects play a predominant role in the laboratory. Needless to say, most scholarly activities generally require adequate forms of communication like conversations, presentations or publications. Thus it is of little surprise that some informants think of the communicative aspect of images, like for example Bodo Baumunk when he reports he can only find a “sort of communicative level with designers” with the help of drawings. (cf. Figs. 59 & 60)

Fig. 59: Sketch for the exhibition “Darwin and Darwinism” at Hygienemuseum Dresden, 1994. Courtesy of Bodo Baumunk.

Without drawings, different ways of thinking (“text versus image”) face each  other  irreconcilably. Sometimes he shows his sketches to the architects, strictly preventing the impression of some kind of patronization on his part. Circumstances permitting, images can thus be effectively used as “communication aids.”

150 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Fig. 60: Exhibition view: “Darwin and Darwinism” at the Hygienemuseum Dresden, 1994. ­Courtesy of Deutsches Hygiene-Museum. Photograph Volker Kreidler.

Images are often used for public relation purposes in a museum, says Andreas Lange, and for this goal they consequently have the function to communicate messages to the wider public. Images work well on posters to advertise events. Ideally, a given motif appeals to people and arises their curiosity and attracts their attention. For these purposes it is not necessary to add any supplemental information such as object labels. Attracting attention and arousing curiosity are the utmost goals to pursue. Following this line of argumentation Jürgen Feige explains that for many museums promotional campaigns play a constantly increasing role. Today museums have to compete with each other and this causes a profound change for them. It is important to use visual means consequently in exhibitions as they promote understanding for the issues at hand. Once I print a photo on a foam-core panel and stick that to a wall, people understand, okay, that motif is intended to explain to me ‘this is how a sluice works’.49 49 Interview on May 15, 2014.



4.4 Purposes and Practices 

 151

It is possible to highlight an original object throughout a passé-partout or through lighting or by using a certain font and if this is consistently carried out in the entire exhibition, it is possible to effectively convey a message. But not only in museums images play a role for communication. Accordingly, Anouk Hoffmeister gives a detailed account of the tools she normally uses when producing and manipulating images. Since the beginning of her work at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory she has kept a notebook which she not only uses as a task list but also as a means for communication and presentation. She takes the notebook out of her bag and quietly scrolls through the pages. She points at sketches she has produced to document or visualize thoughts and ideas, or to make a first draft for a project. She does not view her notes as drawings but rather as doodles (“Kritzeleien”), which she employs as a means of communication. She always uses “thin black fine liners and black, thin pens,” for sketches and drawings or colored crayons and markers that are “commonly used by product designers.” When drawing she rather applies a descriptive style than going into too much detail, she points out, because this is only of provisional character.

Summary When thinking about aspects of visual communication informants have faceto-face conversations, advertisements, or conveying messages in exhibitions in mind. For Anouk Hoffmeister doodles are a form of communication aid – they make it easier for her to express complex ideas and to make herself understandable to her colleagues. Bodo Baumunk shares her view. To his mind images can be helpful in his communication with architects, because some ideas cannot easily be expressed through language. Feige stresses the potential of images to control the viewing direction and thus make it easier for an audience to understand an exhibition in which the messages are supported by visual means. He refers to how objects and images are displayed and he unveils awareness for factors that support or destroy intended effects. Again, even when it comes to communication one of the main functions of images is that they attract attention. All the informants relate in a way to how images can be used to facilitate understanding or direct the view of the audience. But attracting attention at the same time seems to be associated with rather unrestricted forms of visual expression. Lange claims that posters used for advertisements need no further context information; drawings that are used for communication have a rather provisional character (Hoffmeister), and in presentations it is important to reduce complexity and to give the audience enough time to digest the content of images (Feige).

152 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

4.4.5 Conclusions Focusing on the aims and purposes connected to working with images shows how deeply scholarly purposes are linked to certain image producing techniques: drawings are considered a powerful instrument to express ideas or to visualize theoretical problems; some regard them as a way of reflecting and some of the informants see them as an expression of a bodily form of knowledge. Although photography is often associated with documentation purposes, it has clear limitations, as it cannot e.g. reflect the experience in computer games. Even when digitizing artifacts unresolved problems remain such as how size and dimensions can best be represented. All in all many of the informants see limitations to how images accurately serve their purposes and they additionally see limitations to their own skills with respect to dealing with image processing software. From conversations I learned that Hannelore Hoch often asks her husband to double-check her drawings for consistency, because “four eyes see more than two.” She knows that the “human factor – the illustrator” may cause errors. Friederike Saxe and Carola Becker share the view that the coloring of images helps to attract attention and direct the view, but they are aware that such manipulations can result in a “collateral damage” when the interpretation of the underlying data is affected. Gregor Hagedorn reports that “visual fashion trends” are constantly changing and that certain forms of visualization such as three-dimensional graphs make it harder for an audience to interpret visual information properly. Angela Boesl is of the opinion that she is not capable of carrying out complex image manipulations because she has never really learned how to professionally use Photoshop, Illustrator, or any other image editor. Even more important, there are ethical reasons for her to reject most image manipulations in her field of work. All these statements reveal that informants are well aware that close attention has to be paid to how images convey information and that the process of manipulating images has to be controlled carefully. Before analyzing the logics applied when producing and editing images, the term “manipulation” and the associations it evokes among informants are discussed.

4.5 Image Manipulation: Standpoints & Discussion Image manipulation is a term with negative connotations: in everyday language it is mostly associated with the inappropriate alteration of images, implying the intended deception of the viewer. From today’s perspective, the history of image manipulation is tightly connected to the history of analog photography (cf. Terras



4.5 Image Manipulation: Standpoints & Discussion 

 153

2008, 194), but digital technology made manipulations accessible for almost everyone. Image manipulation has been well established on the average user level for a long time. One only has to think of the many options that smartphone apps offer to understand how technology has revolutionized the way images are used and perceived. Today, almost everyone is well aware that the underlying algorithm can imitate many of the qualities of e.g. analog photography. As the term “manipulation” is not neutral especially in everyday language, it is interesting to evaluate how the informants make use of it. Do they consider manipulation a deliberate and an intentional attempt to deceive the viewer, or do they see it as a rather legitimate practice and equivalent to “image editing”? In the course of the conversations, a number of informants spontaneously associate the term manipulation with historical and political events. They refer – more or less specific – to examples of politically motivated cases of image manipulations. Biologist Hannelore Hoch explains how a faked photography of Angela Merkel, arm in arm with Russian president Vladimir Putin, would probably cause a public outcry and even result in a diplomatic crisis. Designer Marc Tamschick remembers how the political collages of Helmut Herzfeld (alias John Heartfield)50 impressed and deeply moved him because of their eye-opening qualities. Jürgen Feige cites a famous historical photograph that originally depicted Lenin together with Trotzki – but after he fell out of favor the latter was erased from the image, which then was used for propaganda purposes. Not all the informants see manipulation in only a bad light. For some of them the term manipulation is deeply connected to various artistic expressions. Curator Theresia Ziehe mentions photographer Andreas Gursky to explain the “creative and positive side” of image manipulations: Well I think manipulation can be unbelievably creative and astoundingly positive. But it always has to be transparent.51

Thus she makes it clear that to her mind image manipulation in an artistic context must have these options, but only if the viewer is aware of such alterations. It is very interesting, she claims, how artists like Gursky use the instrument of image manipulation in order to demonstrate how manipulations only become visible on looking really closely, and this automatically induces the viewer to reflect upon aspects of authenticity in general. This is definitely okay for an artist, she claims, but only if manipulation itself is the subject of the artwork, otherwise the viewer

50 http://www.johnheartfield.com 51 Interview on May 7, 2014.

154 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

is fooled or duped. Likewise Anouk Hoffmeister talks about David LaChapelle’s photographs and points out that these photos looked as if they were strongly manipulated, although they were only staged, but not manipulated. In such works the viewing habits of the audience are challenged and the idea of authenticity in photography is generally questioned. Jürgen Feige from the University of Applied Arts and Sciences is reminded of the works of Warhol or Mondrian. In their artistic handwriting he sees a form of legitimate manipulation, because it remains visible, comprehensible and is not intended to fool or misguide the viewer. Like Theresia Ziehe, Feige stresses the overall necessity of keeping manipulations transparent, but thinks that artists have the right to use this instrument without limitations. In the context of art, image manipulations are a legitimate form of creative expression. (…) If an artist reduces the color scale of his images, like Warhol did, the viewer understands automatically that this is a form of artistic expression – no matter how he or she understands this expression. But if the viewer appreciates the aesthetic form, he or she might find access to it.52

Art historian Angela Boesl claims that images in advertisement campaigns often possess a manipulative power. But in her eyes this is a well-known fact. Image manipulations are everywhere and people are simply used to it. Angela is convinced that images have a deeper layer and produce effects that are never fully understood. This erratic potential in images attracts her because she sees it as a challenge that incites research and analysis. Reflecting on the term makes some of the informants become aware of the limitations of what can be expressed through images above all. Tamschick stresses that it is not really possible to represent nature through images. He and his colleagues have thought deeply about this aspect when setting up the “Haus der Berge” in Berchtesgaden53 (cf. Fig. 61) and found that it was only possible to relate to a “memory space,” particularly, to the emotional recollections people have from their individual experiences in or with nature. For Tamschick the aspect of deception through images is of less importance. He is far more interested in the overall question regarding the mimetic capacity of images. Some informants, like Horst Bredekamp, Gregor Hagedorn, or Andreas Lange see image manipulation as a neutral term. Producing images is regarded as equivalent to manipulating images in the sense of editing them. From their understanding there are not any images without manipulation. At the same time

52 Interview on May 15, 2014. 53 http://www.haus-der-berge.bayern.de



4.5 Image Manipulation: Standpoints & Discussion 

 155

they claim that the understanding of the term always depends on the context. A widely shared value and consensus in this regard is that the truth in images must be trustable. Like others, Bredekamp explains that image manipulation is only problematic when it remains invisible:

Fig. 61: Hauptfilm des Nationalparkzentrums Berchtesgaden, 2013. Courtesy of TAMSCHICK MEDIA+SPACE GMBH. Manipulation is only problematic where it conceals itself. From the perspective of an image scientist it is important to define the degree of variation that can be detected. The quality of the variation itself must become the object of analysis. This is the task of the image scientist and that is why we want the natural sciences to start publishing all the production conditions together with the metadata of the image.54

In sum, most of the informants agree that any deceptive form of image manipulation must be completely rejected and that close attention has to be paid to the fine line between what is acceptable and what should be considered inappropriate. Saxe claims that one has to be “very careful” when working with images, and that it is not easy to tell the difference between cleaning up an image and a manipulation that changes the interpretation of data. (“The concepts flow into each other.”) Boesl thinks that manipulation should be considered problematic when

54 Interview on April 23, 2014.

156 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

it does “not clearly show what (was) manipulated.” Computer scientist Christian Stein discusses (with regard to the ideas of Ferdinand de Saussure) forms of manipulation that are not transparent – but from a completely different disciplinary standpoint. In his eyes, manipulation starts to become problematic when an image does not represent a sign, but a source. The manipulation of a source automatically causes the manipulation of the resulting sign, and then must subsequently be regarded as illegitimate, because it affects the interpretation (and subsequently “truth”). However, though some of the participants accept that the term has a negative connotation in everyday language and is often associated with fraud, most of them do not assume such a narrow concept to be helpful at all. Among those who see manipulation in a more positive light are three designers and a biologist. Carola Becker argues that cleaning up images supports the understanding of images and this is why she does not hesitate to eliminate disturbing factors to provide an unobscured picture. In her eyes, data should be presented in a comprehensive, attractive and convincing way. She thinks that communication is very important for science and that attention plays a core role in this regard. In her role as the producer of the image she decides what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. Andreas Pinkow considers image manipulations legitimate as long as they served the purpose of “searching for truth.” Like Becker he is very goal-oriented and judges manipulations only in the light of what they can or cannot achieve. The image producer in this concept is responsible for deciding what information is relevant, how it is presented and what must remain invisible. There is a widespread consensus among many of the informants as to the necessity of documenting all steps of image acquisition – of the procedures for producing and processing images. Biologists’ agree that as long as the caption explains all the steps of processing all manipulations are appropriate. Likewise, Horst Bredekamp claims that all available information has to be “radically published.” But it is exactly this demand, which at the same time leaves a sour aftertaste, because it hints at the fact that images are in no way self-explanatory. There is a tension to be felt between the assumption that images convey large portions of information instantly and the uncertainty whether and how this information is understood. In our conversation Gregor Hagedorn explained in detail the very basics of analogue photography. Clearly, technology plays a core role for the understanding and evaluation of image manipulations and understanding images requires an in-depth understanding of the tools – analog or digital – that play a role in the process of image production. Often, it needs professional user skills and at least a general understanding of the technologies involved in order to develop an understanding of what kind of manipulations are possible and which manipulations are actually carried out on an image. Again, being capable of seeing requires



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 157

expert skills to produce certain manipulations. Only with such knowledge the viewer is capable of judging whether an image can be trusted. In summary, there are three different concepts of how the term “image manipulation” should be understood. Firstly, manipulation can be seen as a necessary prerequisite for image production. In this reading the term is neutral and not regarded as negative. Secondly, image manipulation refers to all the measures that are carried out in order to make images more effective: the cleaning up of images or the changing of brightness and contrast in order to enhance their potentials. Although such manipulations do not aim at deceiving the viewer, they are in a sense considered problematic in some fields, like in biology, because it cannot clearly be said from which point on the interpretation of data is affected. A third reading identifies image manipulations as intentional (or even unintended) fraud and scholars generally agree that any kind of such misrepresentation is unacceptable. Since it is not easy to determine from which point on manipulations result in misrepresentation image manipulation becomes first and foremost an ethical concern – a concern that requires principled behavior and moral integrity of the individual image producer. As outlined in the introduction and in chapter 3, there have been attempts to establish guidelines for image manipulation and standards in biology that define which aspects are crucial in order to preserve the integrity of images. In the following chapter it will be investigated to what extent such initiatives shape the scholarly use of images and which strategies scholars from other fields apply when producing and editing images.

4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics It makes a difference whether informants talk about why they use images or about how they produce or manipulate images. As has been shown above, working with images does not necessarily require profound theoretical knowledge but more practical skills since it is very often explicitly goal-oriented. Questions regarding the underlying theoretical assumptions are only occasionally on the agenda. Consequently, the subject under discussion causes surprisingly unorthodox and sometimes rather emotional reactions. Some of the participants seem irritated and ask me in order to get a better understanding of how the definitions of the term can be understood. Some rather refer to “standards,” some to “conventions,” others to “traditions.” Computer scientist Alexander Struck inquires whether he can have “more details,” curator Theresia Ziehe wants to clarify what can be understood by the “term in this sense,” while designer Andreas Pinkow admits, he generally has “his problems” with the term. Obviously “rules” and

158 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

“images” are not easily compatible. But what are the implications if people do not consider rules or guidelines relevant for their work with images or when they even view them as meaningless or counter productive? Does working with images in an academic context actually require an awareness of how images are manipulated or even a defined set of rules and guidelines, or are such concerns rather off topic and should better be eliminated from the agenda?

4.6.1 Rules that matter! Scholars who use images in order to document results from experiments are well aware that all steps of image production have to be transparent and documented. Sure enough, molecular biologist Regine Hengge considers rules important when working with images. From the way she makes her point and from her choice of words it appears as if the significance of rules is absolutely evident to her. Rules in her field are mostly “formal rules,” she claims, and instantly refers to the requirements of publishing; for example using “right typography” in an appropriate size can be considered a “rule.” But this is certainly not everything, she stresses. “For instance, there are rules for appropriate image manipulation,” she says. It is for example possible to manipulate very dark images and to “increase brightness somewhat across the entire picture,” because by doing so the information in the image becomes much better visible without the information being altered. However, if the image is only partly manipulated this is a completely different story and “not acceptable.” When communicating primary visual data in a scientific article one is not allowed either to add or change colors, she cites one of the guidelines from her field. By contrast, such manipulations are possible, common and legitimate for “pepped up advertisement images” (“aufgehübschte Werbebilder”) based on original scientific images, because scientists know they have been “pepped up” when appearing on title pages of science journals or on posters advertising science conferences. Scanning electron microscopic images are often false-colored, but it is absolutely necessary to document this in the caption. This is to be regarded as a rule, Regine Hengge emphasizes, even if not necessarily documented in written form. From her experience, scientists become more aware of these rules and start to “explicitly teach them to their students,” she adds. This used to be different, because in the past it was generally assumed that students would grasp the rules of scientific etiquette from “learning by doing” (Orig. Engl.). It turned out this “was not enough,” since repeatedly fabrications or forgeries (“Verfälschungen”) have appeared. Today the necessity “of teaching and learning” the professionally correct use of images is widely recognized among her colleagues. She also emphasizes that the problem also arises because in some fields of science there is



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 159

an enormous “pressure for publication and success” that is directly related to the extent of how much “a research topic is ‘in vogue’ or up-to date.” The quality of the information that can be derived from images also depends on how the image is published. In practice images in journals are printed in a relatively small format and if one wants to really have the complete information present or shown in a picture, one has to look up the corresponding original online-source. This especially plays a role with electron microscope images, because there can be “unbelievable details” in the electronic format. Such details are technically impossible to print out on the small format paper of a journal page, she says and points to the large-scale prints on her office wall showing the “bacterial landscapes” that have been discovered in her lab. Friederike Saxe is of the opinion that the most important rule is not to “manipulate anything.” Obviously she understands manipulation as closely connected to presenting data in a misleading way. This is the “golden rule” she learned early on as a student. Friederike talks slowly with short pauses between her statements. She smiles a little, as if the subject appears somehow bizarre or too far-fetched. However, she sums up what she considers the basics of her discipline. It is very important to describe the method of image acquisition in as much detail and accurately as possible, so that others can reproduce the results: Whatever step played a role in the process of producing an image, the method or in many cases the exposure times (have to be described) – or when it comes to microscopy, (it is important) that one has to describe how an image is produced in detail and this description has to be precise enough, so that someone else theoretically will be able to ‘cook’ the same thing – if he only has the same equipment.55

Summary Hengge and Saxe agree that rules are needed to make sure the data are presented correctly. In their fields there are rules that guide them through the process of image production as well as formal regulations that journals provide for publication purposes. The overall aim is to achieve a clear and undistorted representation that makes it possible for other scholars to reproduce experimental results. But there are problems and concerns as scholars on the one hand do not pay enough attention to these rules, Hengge explains and on the other hand need to be better educated in order to perform or carry out image manipulations appropriately. Notwithstanding she thinks that intense competition in certain scientific 55 Interview on April 29, 2014.

160 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

fields make fraudulent image manipulations more likely than in others, but at the same time claims that her field is an exception in this regard.

4.6.2 Individual Responsibility For Hannelore Hoch it is important that structures “are recognizable and show a certain animal or organism” clearly. But, she adds, visualizations are always interpretations at the same time and therefore it remains primarily in the “eyes of the beholder” how “precisely they are accomplished. In addition all kinds of modification are imaginable, mostly images are more or less processed or edited.” Often “some reflection” obscures the view, which has to be removed. The purpose is to make things clearer, but there are forms of manipulation that she considers more problematic. She gives an example: under certain conditions e.g. “repairing” a damaged artifact in Photoshop is allowed and so is portraying it by replacing damaged parts of the organism. “I would not do that,” she emphasizes and repeats once more “I would not do that, but it is allowed.” It is not “illegal” but sort of “taboo” (“verpönt”). One strong obligation is that if one works with a type specimen (“as far as I know”) it is forbidden “to manipulate it at all.” If one starts a reconstruction because the model is preserved poorly, one is obliged to document all such modifications. She points out that in her field little attention has been paid to colors. The problem of color is very often dealt with carelessly. Especially when comparing images from the 19th century to contemporary images, significant differences in the use of colors can be observed. It certainly makes sense “to put a color scheme right next to them,” to facilitate comparison. But, she admits that, “this does not happen; nobody does it.” “Rules,” Carola Becker says pensively and takes a moment to reflect. She sits slightly bend forward and keeps her hands below the table. She may either talk about images “as objects” or about the process of image production, which makes a big difference, she claims. Carola chooses her words carefully and seems to be attentive and focused. It is standard procedure to accurately document how an image has been produced in the “materials and methods section” of a publication. This includes all the steps in which she uses chemicals to prepare an organism. Again, all analog and digital tools that are used to “put it together” have to be listed. She sees herself as a “rather free” agent in her work with images, but she is aware that in her field of study different “schools of thought” exist. For example she once had an argument with one of her doctoral students about what is ethically tenable or what should better be avoided. Her colleague was strictly against all manipulations due to her academic background. But in her own work Carola follows her own ethical agenda. If something affects the image, like dirt or some “artifact” – she retouches it.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 161

When I have examined five crab claws and know how they look like – that does not mean I have five good images, but sometimes an eyelash falls onto the object table and in front of the dark background you suddenly have a light grey line (…) I remove such artifacts in Photoshop, of course.56

Fig. 62: Male internal reproductive structures of European pea crabs (image with cutting artifact). Carola Becker, 2010.

56 Interview on April 15, 2014.

162 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Such are the liberties she has been talking about and this is a manipulation that not everybody would perform in a similar way. Her doctoral student for example would reject it. According to her, one has to be self-confident enough to be aware of the difference between what is part of a structure and what is not. But there are limitations in image manipulation – things she has tried out, but no longer resorts to at present, she asserts. Such manipulation for example is replacing damaged areas of an organism by copying body parts that are intact (cf. Hannelore Hoch’s statement above), in order to produce an image in which the organism appears undamaged. She reports how she once took the intact side of a museum object (a crab) and replaced the damaged parts in Photoshop. But that was a “grey area.” One is allowed to do this, as long as one is not working with a holotype specimen, or with a catalogued object. She shakes her head as if she intends to distance herself from such practices and repeats that today she would refrain from doing this, because valuable information about the specimen could get lost, like the asymmetry of claws. She looks straight at me and emphasizes, “I would not do that any more, I would rather live with it if a leg is missing somewhere – even if that does not look good.” An example of the post processing of a scholarly image is explained by Carola Becker (cf. Figs. 62 & 63): the image shows sperm cells in the sperm duct of a parasitic pea crab. The cut was carried out with an ultramicrotome, chemically contrasted and the photo was shot with the transmission electron microscope. Originally an analogue photographic technique, the images are developed in a dark room and afterwards digitalized. The image is of good quality because of the perfect fixation, the clearly visible and undamaged structures and the suitable cutout. At the same time there are artifacts disturbing an unobscured view, which result from the process of cutting with a minimally damaged glass knife. In order to enhance visibility (and readability) Stefan Tränkner, a photographer of Senckenberg Museum, erased the scratches in Photoshop. Fig. 64 shows the result. “I never would have managed to do this myself,” biologist Carola Becker explained. From journal editors she has never experienced any form of criticism regarding her images. She occasionally was rather asked to increase contrast and brightness a little or to sharpen the picture. In her opinion that is actually “okay” because nobody can tell how the printed version of a digital image will exactly look like and contrasts are always artificial. The color depths are essential, but “you do not lose anything just by increasing the contrast a little.” What is more, she definitely avoids any cosmetic corrections of the organism. Maybe she removes seaweed that is fixed to the organism – just to increase the visibility of the structures, but she would not remove bristles only to have a perfect image. The use of light is a different issue; here she is at full liberty to produce an image without reflections and with rich contrast. The goal is to have an image that is as “close to the object” as possible and that represents the animal itself in an authentic way. As the animals are dead they need to be positioned for photographing. This



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 163

of course can be considered or seen as “manipulation” as well. As a result the organisms often end up in a rather “unnatural position.”

Fig. 63: Male internal reproductive structures of European pea crabs (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Pinnotheridae): Vas deferens morphology and spermatozoal ultrastructure (image with original cutting artifact erased, TB). Carola Becker, Sebastian Klaus, Christopher C. Tudge, 2013. Courtesy of John Wiley and Sons.57

57 Becker, C., Klaus, S. and Tudge, C. C. (2013), Male internal reproductive structures of European pea crabs (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Pinnotheridae): Vas deferens morphology and spermatozoal ultrastructure. J. Morphol., 274: 1312–1322. DOI: 10.1002/jmor.20184 .

164 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Summary From Hannelore Hoch’s and Carola Becker’s statements it can be derived how scholars judge unobscured and perfect-looking images. Their aim is to have a representation close to the observed object that is clearly readable. At the same time they are aware that there is the danger of producing images that are too idealistic and consequently lead to wrong conclusions. The informants are of the opinion that images do not represent “objective truth,” but that it is the task of the scholar to make decisions and to define how an image looks like. Such decisions rather represent the intentions and the subjective view of the scholar than some objective reality. The gap between a digital image and a print also affects the scholarly understanding of authenticity in images. This is why parameters like contrast or brightness are deemed “artificial.” They can be changed without restrictions, Becker claims. Visibility and attracting attention are important scholarly aims and it is the individual scholar who takes the responsibility for making such decisions. Rather than guidelines, community standards regulate certain practices in the sense that something is taboo. Even though there are guidelines, there is no guarantee that scholars necessarily consult them for their decisions.

4.6.3 Unwritten Rules: Conventions, Community Standards and Self Made Rules Horst Bredekamp confirms he has followed clearly defined rules when working with images. Of course it makes a difference whether one is talking about “teaching” or “publications.” First of all his work is about collecting “authentic images” (“Originalaufnahmen”) of a certain artifact to get started, he explains, focusing on the aspect of publication, and it is important to “add a caption to the image that meets the standard requirements.” He lists the information that has to be documented. A simple “rule-of-thumb” is the name of the artist, which surely is of relevance, the title of a piece of art, the time of creation, the material, and the name of the collection to which the artifact belongs, including the inventory number. He pauses for a moment and adds, “This matches a classical catalogue number in a museum. These are the aspects a good caption must cover.” Another standardized step is to combine images and text in a way that the readers find image and associated text together on a two-page spread. This is of great advantage and not easily accomplished. In the past it cost him “blood, sweat and tears” and long sessions with graphic designers, but the effort was basically inevitable in order to achieve good results. When he prepared his “Bildaktbuch”



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 165

(Engl. “Theory of the Image Act”) he spent a night shift together with the designer at Suhrkamp publishing house, “because there was no other way” to develop “an acceptable solution.” All in all, the rules for publishing are: “high resolution images, good quality in print, acceptable captions and a passable relation between images and text that constitutes a unity.” In the course of his studies he learned to respect images “without any compromise in their autonomy and dignity,” he adds in a solemn voice. “We serve images,” he goes on, “not the other way around.” His highly respectful attitude towards images makes him very critical of any kind of manipulation. Bredekamp enunciates his words emphatically; every word carries meaning. He has his hands on the table, but sometimes raises them and underscores his words with dramatic gestures. He changes the subject and focuses on images in presentations. In PowerPoint presentations it is “intolerable” if arrows remain on the projected images too long in order to highlight a certain aspect. The thought alone seems to disgust him. It is more appropriate to fade out the arrow after some seconds. In his eyes images deserve the same attentiveness as texts. Presenting a cropped image is similar to presenting the cropped endings of a poem, he says and makes a sour face as if he has just bitten into a lemon. Angela Boesl also argues that captions belong to the “tool box” of the art historian. It is most important to explain the production techniques in order to avoid misunderstandings. “Is that a copperplate engraving or an etching?” From the copy of an artwork it is often no longer identifiable how the original image was produced, which on all accounts has to be mentioned in the caption. Apart from this she is determined to reject any other form of manipulation. Only minimal intrusions like a grid or the highlighting of a certain detail are acceptable, constituting the absolute limits for her. The golden rule is to clearly document every single manipulation that has been performed, by reason of respect for the “image, for the original, for the work as a whole.” Interaction designer Anouk Hoffmeister shakes her head and seems irritated. The idea that rules might play a role for the use of images seems utterly surprising to her. There may be “unwritten rules,” and – she adds that as an example – images with a watermark are absolutely taboo in presentations. One has either to purchase the image or to be the producer, with nothing in between. She lists other agreements that come to her mind such as to “avoid a typo-show – if you use a font, do it carefully, do not select randomly, never ever use clip art!” Certainly there are different schools in design and many different opinions of what is considered appropriate or opportune, but her own design handwriting has been pretty much influenced by her academic teacher, she points out. There are many publications that explain “good” typography, but they only represent “trends.” Such publications proclaim guidelines, “things one should do and things one

166 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

should not do.” But during her studies she only attended a “typo-crash-course” and therefore is unable to provide any further details. After all, informants from the field of design do not strongly support the notion that rules are helpful for working with images. In the past Christian Stein used to work in the field of engineering. There certain conventions were mandatory, he remembers, for example using a slide master: If you give a presentation without a slide master, it is all over, no joking – nobody will listen to you anymore, because this is not considered professional – that is just the way it is.58

Aspects of corporate identity have to be clearly visible in presentations as well as certain types of standard diagrams. Everything has to look “somehow technical,” that is the guiding principle. Christian takes a minute to reflect, but then explains that he is not certain whether that can be called “a rule.” In the world of engineering overly complex visualizations are entirely accepted which is completely incomprehensible, as they convey too much information. Whatever does not transmit content or anything that is humorous or without a clear defined function is regarded as problematic. “Information overkill” (Orig. Engl.) is accepted, but too many colors are not allowed, because this is not considered serious enough. When he worked in Braunschweig the color blue in contrast to pink was popular, because it “seemed professional,” he laughs. If he had done “the whole” presentation in pink no one would have listened. In presentations it is not customary to use captions, in contrast to journals where it is regular practice. Certain manipulations are strictly forbidden such as faking or misrepresenting data. In an artistic context he can imagine forgeries being “interesting,” but in his work they are perceived as “very negative.” If wishful thinking is confused with reality this often results in a manipulation, but it is easily possible to detect a manipulation, if one is just attentive enough. Being able to read diagrams is of foremost importance. He views other inappropriate manipulations in “changing perspectives, manipulating scales or highlighting elements.” Besides, it is possible to “sum up data.” This is one of the most powerful means of manipulation. After all it is important to focus on the prospective audience, thus essentially being familiar with the concept of “target groups.” The fact that it can be difficult for an audience to follow a visual presentation may be the reason that Christian is personally fond of presentations that evolve gradually.

58 Interview on April 24, 2014.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 167

Summary A number of informants explain that there are “certain principles or conventions or standards” that play a role for their work. Though such guiding principles necessarily must not come in writing they still shape scholarly practices. For some participants these principles originate in their respective fields of work as for example this applies to art historians who regard it as important to handle images with much respect. In consequence there are certain practices they consider adequate and others they deem inappropriate. Most importantly they point out that a caption is important to document information about the image and that all manipulations are to be avoided or at least performed in a responsible way, which means, being minimally intrusive. Like the biologists the art historians claim that documentation is important to guarantee a correct interpretation of the image. Other informants have highly individualized concepts, which they classify as binding rules. Mostly, such concepts are derived from practical work experience or are connected to notions of taste or appropriateness. Stein shows that in the field of engineering many such conventions exist that decide whether some visual feature is acceptable or not. Such conventions are not standardized, but mediated and negotiated throughout interactions within the community. Aspects of taste and the self-image within the community shape a canon of what is acceptable in presentations. Hoffmeister reports that her way of working with images has been shaped by her academic supervisor. She also stresses that there are a lot of practices designers should refrain from doing. At the same time, such conventions are not codified and what is appropriate or not merely is a question of individual taste and may change over time due to a changing zeitgeist.

4.6.4 The Limits of Rules Gregor Hagedorn claims that there are absolutely no rules in his field concerning the manipulation of images for communication purposes, as long as the original is made available and the data is correct. For presentations, visualizations have to be “adequate relating to time” (meaning, giving the audience enough time to digest the images) and in a lecture it is not possible to use too complex images, otherwise the audience cannot grasp the information. It is necessary to “mercilessly simplify,” he claims. Normally, he erases everything that is not absolutely essential. Any form of “design trash,” like “footers or headers or symbols” one “better” should get rid of. There definitely is a trend to visualize using pseudo-three-dimensional blocks in diagrams, something that may be employed to

168 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

obscure the actual information rather than making it more visible. Sometimes it makes “more sense” to only use two-dimensional diagrams. (cf. Fig. 64)

Fig. 64: Pie chart “Biodiversity.” Gregor Hagedorn, 2001.59

Clearly, Hagedorn thus suggests that a researcher must be at liberty to decide what is appropriate or not when addressing an audience. Following this logic it is exclusively the producer of a presentation who is responsible for its effects. It is a big myth, Carola Zwick stresses that just because science focuses on “rules and methods” it produces more quality. It is rather “the softer the discipline, the more it claims to be based on rules,” she adds. At the Interdisciplinary Laboratory such issues are intensively debated and the designers sometimes are portrayed as “not scientific enough,” but – and in this respect she agrees with many of her colleagues – a designer explicitly has to live with uncertainties. She

59 Chart is based upon data from: Purvis, Andy, and Andy Hector. 2000. “Getting the measure of biodiversity.” Nature vol. 405 (May 11, 2000): 212–219. doi:10.1038/35012221. http://www.nature. com/nature/journal/v405/n6783/full/405212a0.html. Last accessed: February 1, 2016.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 169

has heard of people from her field that have tried to standardize the design process and only recently she has invited guest speakers from a company called IDEO60, a design consultancy that has developed a very strict manual of “rules and methods” to “conquer the sphere of McKinsey or Boston Consulting.” This is an attempt to “trademark” (Orig. Engl.) design competency and to make the process understandable and reliable for outsiders. Furthermore of course “economic aspects” also play a major role. For developing products such a “formalized” process is not helpful. The design process is not controllable through rules, as it is more about testing and proving whether products serve a certain purpose and then to develop them further. If a student asks her advice regarding the development of a certain product she instantly recommends testing it under real conditions. And this means when a student develops a modular vehicle concept I give him three Euro pallets and ask him: go, build it, sit on it, sit in it, staple the roof-laths (…) Before you make up a fancy small vehicle in Rhino I want you to make this an experience for yourself.61

Stage designer Marc Tamschick does not acknowledge that rules can be helpful when it comes to developing ideas. “Rules,” he sighs and rolls back with his movable chair. Rules only destroy the freedom of the first design draft and are “simply not good for the process.” He reflects for a moment and corrects himself. It is very exciting to explore something new in every project, but with “these explorations” the chance of failing increases. Of course it is possible to simply say, okay “let us apply this or that established procedure to reach our goal faster.” But such a pragmatic stance is not what he prefers. He believes that the first draft is always the best, because it is the most original one. What follows is that all the layers of the design process in a sense are rules and “almost threaten” the “original force” of the draft. This first draft is something specifically human, a special force that people can only develop in the discourse with other people in a very effective way. Of course designers have never reached the “density or depth” of scholars, Tamschick points out and explains: We have to translate scholarly ideas and concepts for a certain audience. We translate desires and present their ideas visually so that an audience can grasp them.62

He identifies his role as a translator with the perspective of the “first visitor.” If one finds access to a problem one is able to develop it and then ensuing work is going to be “big fun.” 60 http://www.ideo.com/de 61 Interview on June 6, 2014. 62 Interview on June 17, 2014.

170 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

Andreas Pinkow clarifies that there is no rule, except of finding the “right solution” to a certain problem. In consequence his “mark” changes from project to project. But there is something that is “like a rule.” In many of his projects he reaches the point where a “jump in scale or dimension” is necessary in order to challenge the perspective and make things understandable. I use the original in a different form. I cite from it, I crop it and rearrange things, I do all kinds of things with it.63

For example in an exhibition “for the Eiffel region” (cf. Fig. 65) he wanted to depict the wilderness, but “wilderness in Germany means beech woods,” he explains and “beech woods are totally unpretentious and look like a regular park.” Therefore he tried to generate an image to “irritate and question” this impression and decided to use macro photography and to really zoom into the depths of the details.

Fig. 65: Exhibition view. “Wildnis(t)räume” – Nationalparkzentrum Eifel, 2013. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow.

Thus he could produce the impression of an “extremely colorful wilderness,” in which “a multitude of flora and fauna, of surfaces and colors” were present and

63 Interview on June 4, 2014.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 171

thus he was able to play with people’s expectations and patterns of perception and to simply surprise them. It was not only the spatial distance, but also the mental distance that was needed to “test things” and to find an optimal form. Sometimes though, he adds silently, it does not take any form at all. Curator Bodo Baumunk claims that he does not apply and adhere to any rules in his work with images and objects. He ponders and continues that “in the 1980ies,” one mostly wanted to show originals in order to make visible which “source materials” survived the war. People wanted to know what material evidence was lost and what was still there after 1945 and the partition of Germany. In the meanwhile this has changed. The problem today is more that if he wants to show an object, but does not get it at all or does not have access to it for the entire duration of an exhibition he has to develop “some solution” without presenting a “fake” (Orig. Engl.) and without pretending it is an original or leaving the impression of a placeholder.

Fig. 66: Sketch for the exhibition „Life after Luther. A Cultural History of the Evangelical Parsonage.” (25 October 2013 to 2 March 2014) Bodo Baumunk, 2013. Baumunk uses such drawings to grasp a certain subject intellectually and claims that approaching a subject through drawing has an effect on how a curator later selects objects for an exhibition.64

64 Mail on May 17, 2014.

172 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

His aim has always been to “deepen knowledge,” which has been mostly motivating him. Therefore he can imagine “to scale up” an image, depending on “what spatial impression” or what message he intends to convey. “Such things,” he points out, “are ideologically charged in museum studies but not for me!” Authenticity is relevant, he notes, but he is against giving this subject too much space and letting ideology influence the actual presentation. He critically judges theories from museums studies, which perceive a piece of art as some form of “individual, capable of emotions.” At the same time he respects the “performance of others” and that is why there are limits to how he displays original works of art in exhibitions. The rules for image manipulation („Bildgestaltung”) have to be in accordance with the mission of his museum, claims Andreas Lange. His institution is neither a “museum for computer game-boxes,” nor “a museum for “computer game-hardware,” but a Museum of Computer Games and as such it is devoted to explaining the interaction in games. This is a real challenge because of finding a way to make this experience visible. Of course images are powerful tools in this context. He regularly argues with collectors about how an original should be exhibited and what forms of manipulation are acceptable. If early computer games are displayed in their original consoles it is often necessary to make compromises, since the original displays do not work or exist anymore. Sometimes it is necessary to ignore the original visualization and simply use a TFT monitor instead, which looks differently than – for example – a CRT monitor. (cf. Fig. 67) He is aware that it is not possible to replace an original with a simulation and the collectors always stress this point. But they have their own agendas, he asserts, which can be explained by the fact that they are in possession of very rare original objects. The museum would not be able to simply show many of the games it shows today, if it took a purist stance and only displayed original hardware. This is why it is unavoidable to manipulate images and authenticity in computer games in itself is a complicated issue, he expounds. Computer games are a “bridge element” (Orig. “Brückending”) in the direction of a more process related aspect of images. In a way it is hard to tell what is “authentic” about computer games. On the one hand traditional thinking has produced a concept of “the original,” but in computer games much of “a digital nature” is visible and then questions concerning authenticity stop playing a role. In early computer games the notion that software and hardware were closely linked was accepted, but at the same time it was possible to connect the Atari 2600 to a large color TV or to a small black and white TV and the resulting images were of course not the same.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 173

Fig. 67: Computer Space Machine (Nutting 1971), the first commercialized computer game displayed in the Museum of Computer Games in Berlin. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of Computer Games Berlin. This is the second aspect I want to share with you, “My dear people, we all live in the middle of the digital revolution, and the idea of the original vanishes and what is authentic or not is not relevant any more, because the ‘process’ is what is going to matter more and more.65

He gains such insights especially from his work as a curator of the Museum of Computer Games. It has to be made clear that in other museums preserving the original certainly matters far more.

Summary Mainly informants from the field of design claim that rules play no role for their work with images. In their view images can be used freely regardless of any rules unless they adequately serve their purpose. Design work is about finding the right

65 Interview on June 2, 2014.

174 

 4 Analysis Part I: Ethnographic Interview Project

and appropriate solution, but without any restrictions as to how this is achieved. Some of the curators are equally opposed to any kind of rule. They place their “mission” in the foreground and do not see any obligation to adhere to whatever conventions. Guidelines are identified with a narrow-minded view and mainly seen as a limitation to the potentials of images. Hagedorn claims that it is important to consider the perspective of the viewer in order to avoid an information overload in presentations. But he states that this has nothing to do with what normally is meant by the term “standard.”

4.6.5 Conclusions Although many of the informants first need some time to reflect, the majority still claims that their work with images is overall rule-oriented. Working on a standardized basis or according to established guidelines is regarded as highly rewarding in an academic context, because it underlines the impression that results are reproducible or that methods are well thought-out. Nevertheless, informants do not understand the term “rule” consistently and they have very different concepts as to how rules, guidelines or conventions shape and influence their work. In their reflections they focus on aspects of production, publication as well as presentation. Only a small number of informants from biology refers to and is familiar with binding rules for image manipulation. Some of these rules exist in written form and are mandatory in the process of publication; other logics follow the principle “learning by doing.” Moreover, even though informants are aware that certain rules exist in their field, not all of them actively make use of them. It is individual responsibility they consider a key factor for the professional use of images rather than sticking to binding rules. Despite all attempts to standardize guidelines of image manipulation, at the end of the day the scholar has to decide whether to work according to established standards or not. Many informants refer to shared principles or conventions that are not standardized or written down. Horst Bredekamp explains that images must have captions and Christian Stein relates to community standards that play a role with presentations in the field of engineering – to only name a few. In contrast to these viewpoints most of the informants from the field of design regard rules as meaningless or even counterproductive for their work, because rules restrict creative potentials and limit the ability of using the full power of images. Designers prefer to come to terms with uncertainties to having to stick to defined rules and standards.



4.6 Rules, Guidelines and Practical Logics 

 175

The long and short of it is that binding rules exist more or less exclusively in the field of biology. Most of the informants share the view that it is primarily the responsibility of the researcher to guarantee that images are not used inappropriately. Best practice in dealing with images is inextricably linked to responsible scholarly behavior. But how do editors think about the scholarly practices of image manipulation? Do they think guidelines are sufficiently applied and that these effectively shape scholarly work with images? Do they agree with what we have learned about the scholars’ opinions about the subject, or do they hold different views?

5 Analysis Part II: Asking the Editors As discussed above in chapter 3, journal editors have made great efforts to establish standards with respect to image manipulation in the field of biology in the last decade. Their aim has been to guide authors through the process of publication and to inform them, which image manipulations are acceptable. At the same time they define the limits of what should be done with and to images. Because of their prominent role in shaping the standards of image manipulation, which has effects well beyond the process of publishing, I decided to include their perspective in this study. From what I have found out from the respective literature and from my observations I expected editors to be key informants with respect to answering the core question of whether and how guidelines actually shape scholarly work. Besides, I wanted to disclose how journal editors in or from other fields give thought to the topic. Who if not the editors of journals must really care – since the reputation of their journals is at stake?

5.1 Contacting the Editors In order to develop a better understanding of how guidelines shape scholarly practices when working with images, I planned to ask journal editors from different fields about their opinions on the established guidelines and the role they play for scholarly work. I wanted to ascertain whether journal editors believe that guidelines are an appropriate instrument to provide scholars with instructions and additionally how they assess the limitations of such guidelines. For this purpose I contacted more than 60 editors from over 40 journals worldwide. Due to the fact that I planned to contact people around the globe and in different time zones, I decided to make use of a questionnaire. Therein I explained the background of my studies and kindly invited the editors to answer a defined set of questions (cf. 8.2). In the end, I received a total of 6 written responses and had one rather extended telephone interview with an informant from the executive level of a prominent scientific journal from the field of biology. Editors from all fields filled in the form – with the exception of computer science. I kept track of all the contacts and send reminders after a week. I addressed people on different levels of the editorial boards, like Editors-in-Chief, Deputy-Editors-in-Chief, technical advisors, executive or associate managers in order to compile different views. Because I wanted to facilitate the comparison between the scholars who participated in the interviews and the editors’ statements, I selected journals that matched the disciplinary background of the informants. Consequently I contacted



5.2 The Editor’s Role in the Ecology 

 177

journals from the fields of biology, art history, design, and computer science. In a preparatory and preliminary step I evaluated the publication lists of my informants (whenever available) and got in touch with the journals in which they had published. But not all editors regarded themselves as professional informants for the topic. Among those who replied were a number of scholars who claimed not to have any experience at all, concerning this specific topic. One of the replies may serve as an example: To be quite honest I have never been concerned or involved in control of information in images, largely, I suppose, because there are very few images in the papers I deal with. I therefore would not be a competent respondent to your questions. Perhaps other members of the editorial board of (name of journal) might be able to help you.

Others openly admitted that due to lack of time they were unable to participate. Some of them forwarded my request to colleagues or sent names of other scholars who they believed to be more competent informants for this topic.

5.2 The Editor’s Role in the Ecology No matter whether editors work for a journal or whether they are consulted in the course of a peer review, they can be considered an “invisible species.” They are not physically present in the area where the research is carried out, but still play an important role for academic activities. They decide what will be published and how something will be published; they give instructions, they demand corrections and shape the overall form of a publication. Since publishing assumes what research generally aims at, it is relevant for the performance of the ecology in a sense of the maintenance of the ecological balance. At the same time, editors and – respectively – their journals are to a full extent dependent on the outcome that scholars produce. This close relationship between these two groups may in ecological terms be looked upon as a form of “symbiosis.” But what are the core values that play a role in maintaining this symbiotic relationship? Truth is a core value for this symbiosis, and so is trust. Scholars need to confide in what they read in journals, implying the data and all the information provided are correct. Once this core value is transgressed the stability of the entire system is endangered. But there is a significant problem with regard to the topic discussed here, since there is no clear consensus of how truth in images can be preserved or even understood. This is one reason why establishing standards of image manipulation is such a complicated issue. The economic factor plays a role as well, since journals have to invest many resources spot-checking images

178 

 5 Analysis Part II: Asking the Editors

to detect whether guidelines are violated or guaranteeing that the data is represented correctly. In the face of such challenges, scholars and editors alike must have a common interest to preserve the integrity of images, but the question of who finally takes responsibility is still unanswered. Although there is a fervent outcry for trust it is doubt that reverberates. The ethical responsibility of the individual researcher is frequently mentioned. Among all seven participants in the survey, only one editor explicitly holds journals responsible for maintaining and uphold the integrity of the published images. Mostly, editors affirm that the universities have to take responsibility and that they must enhance the education of their students in this particular direction and introduce scientific methodology classes into their curriculum. Additionally the individual scholar to their mind has to overcome ignorance and pay more attention to the rules. This coincides with the fact that such demands are in conflict with the lack of appropriate standards clarifying which aspects constitute a misrepresentation (a fact editors acknowledge). Indeed, acting in a responsible way implies that scholars know what to do. But how can they act responsibly without clear instructions and so many unanswered questions? Information ecologies are dependent on the reliability of information (as most academic contexts are) and consequently it must have a destabilizing effect on such ecologies when it is claimed that there is never a 100% guarantee that a specific piece of information is correct. However, some self-regulating mechanisms help to restore trust, like for example initiatives like PubPeer or Retraction Watch, which support the integrity of science by detecting inappropriate manipulations even after a research paper passed through the editorial review process.

5.3 Editors Reaction and Statements: Trust, Responsibility and the Limits of Guidelines From the editors’ responses I gained the impression that aspects of image manipulation were pretty much part of their daily routine. (cf. Fig. 68) There is a broad consensus that technological innovations and the introduction of image editing software have profoundly changed the scholarly publication process over the last decade. But not surprisingly editors from different fields prioritize distinct issues. Some editors (two informants from biology (D) and design (L)) shared the opinion that scholars have become more and more skilled in the use of image-editing software and that this has become the gateway for the fraudulent use of images. An editor from the field of biology pointed out that “questions concerning the presentation of primary data have come up more frequently” and he



5.3 Editors Reaction and Statements 

 179

regretted the fact that there is not yet a consensus as to what actually constitutes a misrepresentation. Accordingly the trust in scientific images has been eroded which has backfired on the academic community in the form of “time, effort and money.” There is no denying the fact that the economic consequences of image manipulation are to a large degree considered a serious issue, but editors see the economic costs of screening all submitted images for possible manipulations as more problematic than retractions or than dealing with the implications of fraud scandals. Editors Initial C

Journal/Field

D

Biology

L

Design

N

Design

Q

Natural History

Yes. Never encountered a case of inappropri atemanipulation. manipulation. inappropriate Scholars in the field operate on a basis of trust.

X

Art History

Y

Biology

Since 1978. Problems arise from poor quality images and problems of access to the “original”. Established guidelines around 2000. Guidelines alone cannot solve the problem of detecting and preventing image manipulations.

No specific field

Guidelines established (since when) when) and limitations (since and limitations Guidelines for scanning and publication But: . But: instructions for publication. Each situation is unique. Yes, but can only partly avoid inappropriate manipulations. Guidelines are not easy to understand, only consulted when submitting images, cannot cover all possible cases, cannot prevent manipulations if the author intentionally carries them out. No guidelines established. Rules of World Press Photo could be followed, but intentional manipu lations are are difficult difficult to to detect. detect. manipulations Copyrights must be clarified and manipulations documented.

Fig. 68: Table: Journal editors’ perspective on image manipulation.

Other measures recommended Ethical issues must be debated in graduate schools Routine checks, educating researchers, talking about these issues.

none

Academic education needs to underline that image manipulations are no trivial offence. Establishing absolute requirements (including blood, tissue, DNA samples) for type specimen. The prices for copyright fees should be lowered. Research must be carried out in order to learn more about about how manipulations can be prevented.

180 

 5 Analysis Part II: Asking the Editors

A second group from the field of art and design specified copyright issues as most relevant. The claim is that too many (mostly young) designers download open-access images from the Internet and manipulate them for their purposes without bearing in mind any sense of what is ethically right or legally acceptable. (N: “They use images as background illustrations for their own work.”) At the same time editors highly praise the potentials of image-editing software and emphasize that the average quality of images in publications today is much higher than it used to be (C + Q). They attribute the improvement of image quality to a form of image manipulation that affects the authenticity of images, but only in the sense of a legitimate practice that enables them to achieve a far better image quality. It is important to mention that a number of editors concede they cannot distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate image manipulation. Such boundaries are perceived as “tricky” (C), because for “some authors” it is not unusual to clean up images and “to eliminate distracting blemishes, like foxing or stains” – the editor explains. Although journals “encourage” authors to leave such information in the produced files, the author is completely responsible for the decision in the long run. An informant from the field of biology (D) expounds that inappropriate manipulation starts when the interpretation of data is affected. Moreover, an editor from a design journal reports that it is common practice for many designers to present their project concepts as if they were finalized or carried out versions. This may cause serious problems for the reputation of a journal even if this does not entail legal issues. Only one of the editors (L, design) explicitly mentions that guidelines are an important instrument for preventing inappropriate manipulations, but admits that manipulations generally are difficult to detect. Another informant from the field of graphic design looks upon binding rules as “an improvement” and underlines the relevance of developing technical solutions to automatically detect image manipulations. But, she is fully aware of the fact that this is not a very realistic scenario, and recommends that this topic should be included in method classes at universities and students should be instructed that manipulation is not a trivial offence. An editor from biology (D) agrees that more measures are needed because it is unlikely that all researchers really comprehend guidelines and fully know their implications. Mostly, researchers only start to think about guidelines of image manipulation in the process of publishing. They tend to neglect this aspect in their respective research phases. But image manipulation of course starts with the process of image acquisition. Moreover, guidelines cannot cover all conceivable practices, because they are simply too diverse and in the end cannot prevent manipulations performed on purpose. Each case, another editor adds (C), is unique in its own way and thus only the most general guidelines can be implemented. It is simply not feasible to establish guidelines that include all imaginable practices.

5.4 Summary 

 181

Editors see major challenges in preserving the integrity of images and their authenticity. At the same time trust is of unmitigated importance for scholars. Of course, one editor from biology (D) claims, scholars must be able to rely on the information presented in images in order to stay up to date regarding the knowledge that is gained in their respective fields, but it is the editors’ task to guarantee that the information in images is without any doubt correct. The question remains open whether it may be helpful to store the primary data gained from an experiment together with the published image or which other control mechanisms have to be implemented to detect manipulations. This dilemma between ethical responsibility, trust and control becomes obvious in another editor’s (N, design) statement. It becomes more and complicated to determine whether an image represents “truth” (Orig. “den Wahrheitsgehalt bestimmen”) and consequently it is essential for editors and journalists to pay close attention to the authenticity of images. In this day and age when images are posted on the Internet often without citing a source, putting effort in accurate documentation turns into something like a “unique selling proposition” for editors. Again, preserving the authenticity of images is understood as adding and supplementing appropriate context information in the way that text and image correspond correctly. One editor from art history (C) sees the challenge more in how images are used and reproduced. He comments that “fair use” is most important and claims that it is absolutely crucial to maintain “the freedom of expression.” The challenges in dealing with images from this perspective are not of an intellectual nature, but of a rather legal and commercial one. There is never a 100% guarantee that the information in an image is utterly correct, another editor (N, design) remarks. This kind of uncertainty documents how the crisis of visual representation left its traces even in the editors’ minds.

5.4 Summary When it comes to image manipulation and the influence of guidelines in scholarly work, two different views play a crucial role: first, editors from biology stress that images must represent data correctly and that manipulations must not affect the interpretation of data. Nevertheless editors are aware that guidelines do not cover all dimensions of image manipulation, and they claim that scholars have an ethical responsibility to make sure the data is correctly represented. Moreover, some editors emphasize that there are scholars who only pay attention to guidelines during the publication process. They also assure that image manipulation sets in long before the stage of publication has been reached.

182 

 5 Analysis Part II: Asking the Editors

Consequently there is a significant degree of uncertainty that scholars and editors have to accept and cope with. There possibly is a hidden potential in this particular uncertainty, one of the editors assures and explains that this potential is closely connected to the importance and necessity to examine images in a very attentive manner and that it is crucial to critically question their information content – in other words to put each image under rigorous scrutiny. This is a reminder of the critical attitude towards all images that Albrecht recommended: Glauben Sie in Zukunft keiner Ausstellung, die hauptsächlich mit Bildern argumentiert; misstrauen Sie immer dem Kontext, in dem ein Bild gezeigt wird und fragen Sie nach dem Wer? Wann? Wo? Und lachen Sie alle aus, die von der Wende zum Bild als einer kopernikanischen Revolution schwadronieren. (Albrecht 2007, 47)

Second, there are editors mainly from the fields of art and design who assert that copyright issues matter most. This is due to their specific understanding of what image manipulation implies. They are less concerned about aspects of image manipulation in the sense that the information in the image misrepresents data or misleads the viewer. They are much more interested in how context information is presented. Since images in art history do not represent data as results of experiments, guidelines for the production or editing of images play a marginal or no role at all. In conclusion, editors stress or accentuate that guidelines matter, though they are not convinced that they embrace all conceivable practices and situations in all scholarly fields. From their perspectives, scholars often do not comply with these guidelines which is a consequence of the failure of guidelines to adequately respond to and address the demands of scholarly work. A significant grey zone remains and leaves ample room for doubt and mistrust. Nevertheless, with regard to the information ecology metaphor there are mechanisms to keep the symbiosis between scholars and editors stable and functioning. In ecological (metaphorical) terms, both groups – scholars and journal editors – are well aware that their relation is all-important and that by undermining trust they seriously endanger the ecological balance in the academic realm. The fact that responsibility is mainly assigned to the individual researcher can be interpreted as an attempt to protect and shelter the big picture ecology from harm. Moreover, it is interesting that a certain level of ignorance is abundantly tolerated. By accepting the fact that guidelines cannot cover all imaginable or likely practices, editors accept the limitations of what can be achieved through guidelines. Although this surely is extremely regrettable, it seems as if it is not perceived as the end of the world and definitely not as a problem that can be easily solved. The boat might have a leak, but it is not sinking.

6 Final Remarks: Shaping Images It has been documented in this work that only few informants produce and edit images adhering to and acting in accordance with established guidelines. Obviously, drawing the line between what is appropriate or inappropriate image manipulation is beyond a simple and practical solution and establishing definite and binding operative instructions remains challenging. Regardless of whether manipulations are to be considered appropriate or inappropriate – there are basically two different procedures in connection with image manipulation: intentional and unintentional manipulation. Without exception the informants that participated in this interview project unequivocally deemed manipulations with the intent to deceive the viewer as unethical. As it is not all malapropos manipulations occur against the background of unethical purposes or undertakings. Some editors accentuated that this may be due to the fact that guidelines do not provide all the required information for scholars to prevent inappropriate editing. Others thought that fraudulent manipulations happen due to a pressure to publish and that there may be a higher percentage of image manipulations in top ranked journals. However, this study clearly reveals that scholars from different fields have fundamentally diverse concepts as to their specific understanding of image manipulation. Accordingly some of the designers use the term image manipulation in a more or less neutral way or employ it as a synonym for “image editing” thus avoiding any negative connotations. Their sole aim is to generate solutions that serve a given purpose best. They reject the relevance and applicability of guidelines for their work. In their eyes guidelines are understood as restrictions that limit and set boundaries for the extensive potential of images. Their working style has certain similarities to the one of artists. It is fully taken for granted that the “hands are predominantly thinking” as the foremost agents in a creative and sometimes analytical process and that achieving the state of creativity is a necessary prerequisite in order to attain the aim of producing tailored solutions. Though biologists are in accordance with the fact that the perspective of the viewer shapes how an image is perceived and understood, they fervently claim that any image must adequately and genuinely represent a scholarly observation. Thus, it stands to reason that guidelines in the field of biology are most advanced. Generally, cleaning up images is considered rather problematic and partially altering images, cloning or rotating images is considered a violation of guidelines – especially when the interpretation is affected. In their commentaries to guidelines editors demand that scholars are obliged to provide detailed information on all editing measures in order to keep them transparent. This can either be achieved by way of image captions or methods

184 

 6 Final Remarks: Shaping Images

sections of a publication, or, as some of the participants mentioned in the interviews manipulations can sometimes even remain visible in the image itself. One example of such visible manipulation is the image “The blood-brain barrier in a live zebrafish embryo” (cf. Fig. 69) produced by Dr. Jennifer L. Peters and Dr. Michael R. Taylor of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee.

Fig. 69: The blood-brain barrier in a live zebrafish embryo. Photograph by Dr. Jennifer L. Peters and Dr. Michael R. Taylor, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, 2012.

In the interviews I used this motif (among a number of other images) in order to discuss how informants assess the information value of scientific images. Many of the informants thought that this was a good example of how images can effectively convey information and knowledge. Some of them praised the visual qualities of the image, its deep structures and the way colors are applied. Some of the participants assumed the colors represented epistemic codes and thus expected a certain degree of intellectual complexity, others underscored that the image allows an undistorted view of the many manipulations that were necessary to produce it. Many informants claimed that it is the intensity of the light-dark contrast and the colors that make the image attractive and support understanding and some others claimed that the dark background gave the image a certain mysterious depth.



6 Final Remarks: Shaping Images 

 185

However, this example clearly shows how much it depends on the imaging technique whether manipulations remain visible in an image. Remarkably, even if scholars are fully aware of the existence of guidelines they do not necessarily always feel obliged to apply them. Generally there is a fundamental tension and ambivalence scholars have to deal with: on the one hand scholars from the field of biology are eager and entitled to put much effort in producing clear, and visually appealing images, meeting the aim of attracting attention, while on the other hand there is no doubt that the more images are cleaned up (or “beautified”) the greater the risk is of producing inappropriate manipulations. Another possible safeguarding measure is that together with the published image the original image should be procured on demand. At the same time some of the biologists claim that the individual scholar is to be held responsible for all manipulations, a view that is shared by informants from the field of art history. In this field the individual researcher is expected to make sure that a copy exactly represents the original. Most manipulations are considered inappropriate and scholars are expected to treat images carefully and with great respect. With regard to this ethical responsibility a surprising resonance can be found among informants from art history and biology. Images used to document an observation must adequately represent the scholarly view. Biologists and art historians are expected to closely monitor this process to ensure that the images they publish adequately represent their observations. Finally, in the ongoing debate about the consequences of image manipulation and the integrity of research it has been frequently mentioned that there is no reason to generally question the ethical integrity of the average scholar. Nevertheless, since many inappropriate image manipulations do not occur due to fraudulent intent clear and unambiguous guidelines are important for scholars in order to carry out their work in a sound way. Establishing such guidelines will remain a fundamental challenge in the future, since there is a lot of blame shifting associated with the process. Journal editors hold the authors responsible, but are aware of the fact that whenever manipulations pass the review process unnoticed the reputation of their journals potentially is in danger. Developing automated solutions for the detection of manipulation obviously is not a trivial task, since the capacities of image editing software is constantly changing. In conclusion it has to be pointed out that despite the many obstacles and discrepancies there has not yet been a detrimental impact on the stability of the entire eco-system. However, fundamental intellectual challenges need to be dealt with. It has been shown in this study that scholarly work with images is in many cases first and foremost purpose driven. The assumption that images convey truth must therefore critically be evaluated in the light of the fast growing capacities of

186 

 6 Final Remarks: Shaping Images

imaging techniques. Moreover, future research will have to include the demands and interests of all parties involved. Authors and editors alike must engage in a joint effort in order to evaluate workflows in journals as well as in research and thus deepen the understanding as to achieving best practice in scholarly image work. A call for individual responsibility is mandatory and indispensable. A concerted effort as well as a more systematic evaluation of the workflows and competencies in scholarly journals is a precondition for preserving professional standards of scholarly work and beyond.

7 References 7.1 Monographs and Articles Abbott, Andrew. 2001. Chaos of Disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Adelmann, Ralf, Jan Frercks, Martina Heßler, and Jochen Hennig. 2009. Datenbilder. Zur digitalen Bildpraxis in den Naturwissenschaften. Bielefeld: transcript. Albersmeyer-Bingen, Helga. 1986. Common Sense. Ein Beitrag zur Wissenssoziologie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Albrecht, Clemens. 2007. “Wörter lügen manchmal, Bilder immer. Wissenschaft nach der Wende zum Bild”. In Mit Bildern lügen, edited by Wolf-Andreas Liebert, and Thomas Metten, 29–49. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Bailey, Carol A. 2007. A Guide to Qualitative Field Research. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE. Banks, Marcus, and Howard Morphy, eds. 1997. Rethinking Visual Anthropology. (Introduction) 1–35. London and New Haven: Yale University Press. Banks, Marcus, and Jay Ruby. 2012. “Made to be Seen: Historical Perspectives on Visual Anthropology.” In Made to be Seen. Perspectives on the History of Visual Anthropology, edited by Marcus Banks, and Jay Ruby. 1–18. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Barry, Ann Marie Seward. 1997. Visual Intelligence. Perception, Image, and Manipulation in Visual Communication. New York: University of New York Press. Bataille, Georges. 1955. Die vorgeschichtliche Malerei. Lascaux oder die Geburt der Kunst. Genf: Skira. Bateson, Gregory. 2000. “Conscious Purpose versus Nature.” In Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. Blake, William. 1996. “From the Marriage of Heaven and Hell.” In Everyman’s Poetry. William Blake. p. 59. London: J. M. Dent Beer, Bettina, ed. 2008. Methoden ethnologischer Feldforschung. Berlin: Reimer. Belting, Hans. 2011. Bild-Anthropologie. Entwürfe für eine Bildwissenschaft. München: Wilhelm Fink. Bernard, Russel. 1995. Research Methods in Anthropology. Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Bredekamp, Horst, Angela Fischel, Birgit Schneider, and Gabriele Werner. 2003. “Bilder in Prozessen”. In Bildwelten des Wissens. Kunsthistorisches Jahrbuch für Bildkritik. 1, 1. edited by Claudia Blümle, Horst Bredekamp, and Matthias Bruhn. 9–20. Berlin: De Gruyter. Bredekamp, Horst, ed. 2008. Das technische Bild: Kompendium zu einer Stilgeschichte wissenschaftlicher Bilder. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Bredekamp, Horst, ed. 2010. Theorie des Bildakts. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp. Bruhn, Matthias, and Vera Dünkel. 2008. “The Image as Cultural Technology.” In Visual Literacy, edited by James Elkins. 165–178. New York and London: Routledge. Burda, Hubert, and Christa Maar. 2004. Iconic Turn. Die neue Macht der Bilder. Köln: DuMont. Burri, Regula Valérie, and Joseph Dumit. 2007. “Social Studies of Scientific Imaging and Visualization.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman. Third Edition. 297–318. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.

188 

 7 References

Burri, Regula Valérie. 2008. Doing Images. Zur Praxis medizinischer Bilder. Bielefeld: transkript Verlag. Coopmans, Catelijne, Janet Vertesi, Michael Lynch, and Steve Woolgar, eds. 2014. Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Daston, Lorraine, and Peter Galison. 2007. Objektivität. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. Davenport, Thomas H., with Laurance Prusak. 1997. Information Ecology. Mastering the Information and Knowledge Environment. Why Technology is not enough for Success in the Information Age. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Deussen, Oliver. 2007. Bildmanipulation: Wie Computer unsere Wirklichkeit verzerren. Heidelberg: Spektrum Akademie Verlag. Eggmann, Sabine. 2004. “Der Blick auf das Eigene. Ein kulturwissenschaftlicher Zugang zur Kulturwissenschaft.” In Wissenschaftskulturen – Experimentalkulturen – Gelehrtenkulturen, edited by Markus Arnold, and Gert Dressel. 127–135. Wien: Turia & Kant. Elkins, James, ed. 2008. Visual Literacy. (Introduction) 1–9. New York: Routledge. Frankel, Felice G., and Angela De Pace. 2012. Visual Strategies. A Practical Guide to Graphics for Scientists and Engineers. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Fyfe, Gordon, and John Law. 1988. Picturing Power. Visual Depiction and Social Relations. London and New York: Routledge. Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” In The Interpretation Of Cultures: Selected Essays. 3–32. New York: Basic Books. Geertz, Clifford. 1983. “Common Sense as a Cultural System.” In Local Knowledge. 73–93. New York: Basic Books. Goffman, Erving. 1956. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. Gorman, Andreas. 2000. „Imaginationen des Unsichtbaren. Zur Gattungsgeschichte des wissenschaftlichen Diagramms“. In Erkenntnis, Erfindung Konstruktion. Studien zur Bildgeschichte von Naturwissenschaften und Technik vom 16. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert, edited by Hans Holländer, 51–71. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag. Grimshaw, Anna, and Amanda Ravetz, eds. 2004. Visualizing Anthropology. Experimenting with Image-Based Ethnography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Heintz, Bettina, and Jörg Huber. 2001. Mit dem Auge denken. Strategien der Sichtbarmachung in wissenschaftlichen und virtuellen Welten. Zürich: Edition Voldemeer. Heßler, Martina, and Dieter Mersch, eds. 2009. Bildlogik oder Was heißt visuelles Denken? Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Hütter, Hans Walter, and Petra Rösgen, eds. 2000. Bilder, die lügen. Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung im Haus der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn, 27. November 1998 bis 28. Februar 1999. Bonn: Bouvier. Ingold, Tim, ed. 2011. Redrawing Anthropology. Materials, Movements, Lines. Farnham: Ashgate. Kerner, Günter, and Rolf Duroy. 1988. Bildsprache 1. Lehrbuch für den Fachbereich Bildende Kunst. Visuelle Kommunikation in der Sekundarstufe II. München: Don Bosco Verlag. Knäusl, Hanna, and Lea Schubart. 2013. “Kontextsensitive Bildauswahl? Studien zur Bild-Präferenz”. In Informationswissenschaft zwischen virtueller Infrastruktur und materiellen Lebenswelten. Tagungsband des 13. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2013), Potsdam, 19.-22. März 2013, edited by H.-C. Hobohm, 349 – 360. Glückstadt: Verlag Werner Hülsbusch.



7.1 Monographs and Articles 

 189

Keifenheim, Barbara. 2003. “Visual Anthropology in a World of Images.” In Ethnoscripts vol. 5-1 (4/2003), Visuelle Anthropologie: 7–16. Lang, Rudolf E. 2014. Sehen. Wie sich das Gehirn ein Bild macht. Stuttgart: Reclam. Latour, Bruno, and Peter Weibel, eds. 2002. Iconoclash. Beyond the Image Wars in Science, Religion, and Art. Karlsruhe and Cambridge: MIT Press. Latour, Bruno. 2014. “The more manipulations the better.” In Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited, edited by Catelijne Coopmans, Janet Vertesi, Michael Lynch, and Steve Woolgar. 347–350. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Lauber-Reymann. 2010. Informationsressourcen. Ein Handbuch für Bibliothekare und Informationsspezialisten. Berlin: De Gruyter. Liebert, Wolf-Andreas, and Thomas Metten. 2007. “Bild, Handlung und Kultur. Kulturwissenschaftliche Überlegungen zum Handeln mit Bildern”. In Mit Bildern lügen, edited by Wolf-Andreas Liebert, and Thomas Metten, 7–27. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Lüders, Christian. 2007. “Beobachten im Feld und Ethnographie”. In Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch, edited by Uwe Flick, Ernst von Kardoff, and Ines Steincke, 384–401. Berlin: Rowohlt Verlag. Maar, Christa, Hona-Ulrich Obrist, and Ernst Pöppel, eds. 2000. Weltwissen Wissenswelt. Das globale Netz von Text und Bild. Köln: DuMont. Macdonald, Sharon, and Paul Basu. 2007. Exhibition Experiments. Malden, Oxford, Carlton: Blackwell Publishing. MacDougall, David. 1997. “The Visual in Anthropology.” In Rethinking Visual Anthropology, edited by Marcus Banks, and Howard Morphy. 276–295. London and New Haven: Yale University Press. Marion, Jonathan S., and Jerome W. Crowder. 2013. Visual Research. A Concise Introduction to Thinking Visually. London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Mareis, Claudia. 2010. „Entwerfen – Wissen – Produzieren. Designforschung im Anwendungskontext”. In Entwerfen – Wissen – Produzieren. Designforschung im Anwendungskontext, edited by Claudia Mareis, Gesche Joost, and Kora Kimpel, 9–33. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Mayer, Annika. 2005. “Fotographie – ein geeignetes Mittel zur Feldforschung?” (seminar paper), Norderstedt: Grin Verlag. Mayring, Philipp. 2011. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim and Basel: Beltz. Mersch, Dieter. 2005. “Das Bild als Argument. Visualisierungsstrategien in der Naturwissenschaft”. In Ikonologie des Performativen, edited by Christian Wulf, and Jörg Zirfas, 322–344. Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Mitchell, W.T.J. 2008. Das Leben der Bilder. Eine Theorie der visuellen Kultur. München: C. H. Beck Verlag. Nardi, Bonnie A., and Vicki O’Day. 1999. Information Ecologies. Using Technology with Heart. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Pink, Sarah. 2013. Doing Visual Ethnography. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage. Proctor, Robert N. 2008. “Agnotology. A Missing Term to Describe the Cultural Production of Ignorance (and Its Study).” In Agnotology. The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance, edited by Robert N. Proctor and Londa Schiebinger, 1–33. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

190 

 7 References

Raddatz, Christoph. 2009. Bildmanipulation aus der Perspektive des 21. Jahrhunderts - Vertrauensverlust durch mediale Täuschungen der Rezipienten. (Bachelor thesis): Gröditz Sauerländer, Willibald. 2004. “Iconic turn? Eine Bitte um Ikonoklasmus”. In Iconic Turn. Die neue Macht der Bilder, 407–426. Köln: DuMont. Sachs-Hombach, Klaus, and Jörg R.J. Schirra, eds. 2013. Origins of Pictures. Anthropological Discourses in Image Science. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Schäffner, Wolfgang. 2014. „The Design Turn. Eine wissenschaftliche Revolution im Geiste der Gestaltung“. In Entwerfen – Wissen – Produzieren. Designforschung im Anwendungskontext, edited by Claudia Mareis, Gesche Joost, and Kora Kimpel, 9–33. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Schirra, Jörg R.J., and Klaus Sachs-Hombach. 2013. “The Anthropological Function of Pictures.” In Origins of Pictures. Anthropological Discourses in Image Science, edited by Klaus Sachs-Hombach, and Jörg Schirra, 132–159. Köln: Halem. Schulz, Kathryn. 2010. Being Wrong. Adventures in the Margin of Error. New York: HarperCollins. Schutt, Russell K. 2004. Investigating the Social World. The Process and Practice of Research. Los Angeles: Sage. Seadle, Michael. 2013. “Ethnographische Verfahren der Datenerhebung”. In Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis, edited by Rainer Kuhlen, Wolfgang Semar, and Dietmar Strauch, 136–138. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Saur. Sontag, Susan. 1999. “The image world.” In Visual Culture: the Reader, edited by Jessica Evans, and Stuart Hall, 80–94. London, Thousand Oaks, New Dheli: Sage publications, in association with The Open University. Sorensen, Roy. 2008. Seeing dark Things. The Philosophy of Shadows. New York: Oxford University Press. Stoellger, Philipp. 2014. “Einleitung: Die Spur der Hand im Bild oder: was und wie Bilder unsichtbar machen”. In Un/Sichtbar. Wie Bilder un/sichtbar machen, edited by Philipp Stoellger, 1–19. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann. Taussig, Michael. 1997. Mimesis und Alterität. Eine eigenwillige Geschichte der Sinne. Hamburg: Europäische Verlagsanstalt Hamburg. Taussig, Michael. 2011. I Swear I Saw This. Drawings in Fieldwork Notebooks, Namely my Own. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Terras, Melissa M. 2008. Digital Images for the Information Professional. Hampshire: Ashgate. Van Maanen, John. 1988. Tales of the Field. On Writing Ethnography. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Weber, Jutta, ed. 2010. Interdisziplinierung? Zum Wissenstransfer zwischen den Geistes-, Sozial- und Technowissenschaften, Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. Wolpert, Lewis. 2004. Unglaubliche Wissenschaft. Frankfurt/Main: Eichborn Verlag.

7.2 Journal Articles and Online Resources “A Picture Worth a Thousand Words (of Explanation).” 2006. Nature Methods Editorial vol. 3, no. 4, (April 2006): 237. Accessed: October 24, 2015. http://www.nature.com/nmeth/ journal/v3/n4/full/nmeth0406-237.html .



7.2 Journal Articles and Online Resources 

 191

“Appreciating Data: Warts, Wrinkles and all.” 2006. Nature Cell Biology Editorial vol. 8, no. 3, (March 2006): 203. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v8/ n3/full/ncb0306-203a.html . Barry, Andrew, Georgina Born, and Gisa Weszkalnys. 2008. “Logics of Interdisciplinarity.” Economy and Society, vol. 37, no. 1: 20–49. DOI: 10.1080/03085140701760841. “Beautification and Fraud.” 2006. Nature Cell Biology Editorial, vol. 8, no. 2, (February 2006): 101–102. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/ncb/journal/v8/n2/full/ ncb0206-101.html . Becker, C., Klaus, S. and C. C. Tudge. 2013. “Male internal reproductive structures of European pea crabs (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Pinnotheridae): Vas deferens morphology and spermatozoal ultrastructure”. Journal of Morphology, 274: 1312–1322. DOI: 10.1002/ jmor.20184 . Bradley, Margaret M., Mark K. Greenwald, Margaret C. Petry, and Peter J. Lang. 1992. “Remembering Pictures: Pleasure and Arousal in Memory.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, vol. 18, no. 2: 379–390. Brockelmann, Martin, and Christian Wolff. 2013. “3D-Visualisierungen – Potenziale in Forschung und Lehre im Kontext von Informationswissenschaft und Medieninformatik”. Information. Wissenschaft & Praxis vol. 64, no. 4: 209–213. DOI: 10.1515/iwp-2013-0031. Capurro, Rafael. 1989. “Towards an Information Ecology. Contribution to the NORDINFO International seminar “Information and Quality”, Royal School of Librarianship, Copenhagen, 23–25 August 1989. Proceedings: I. Wormell ed.: Information Quality. Definitions and Dimensions. London, Taylor Graham 1990, p. 122–139. Accessed: June 24, 2016. http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/html/10150/105705/nordinf.htm. Cromey, Douglas W. 2010. “Avoiding Twisted Pixels: Ethical Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Manipulation of Scientific Digital Images.” Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 16, no. 4, (December 2010): 639–667. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007%2Fs11948-010-9201-y#/page-1. “CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications.” 2012. The Council of Science Editors (approved by the CSE Board of Directors on March 30, 2012). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/white-paper-on-publication-ethics/. Cukier, K. 2010. “Data, data everywhere. A special report on managing information.” The Economist, vol. 8671 (February 27, 2010): 3–18. Cyranoski, David. 2013. “Fallout from Hailed Cloning Paper.” Nature News 497 (May 30, 2013): 543–544. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/news/fallout-from-hailedcloning-paper-1.13078 . Cyranoski, David. 2013. “Stem-cell Cloner Acknowledges Errors in Groundbreaking Paper.” Nature News (May 23, 2013). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/news/ stem-cell-cloner-acknowledges-errors-in-groundbreaking-paper-1.13060 . Cyranoski, David. 2014. “Whistle-blower Breaks his Silence.” Nature News 505 (January 30, 2014): 593–594. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/news/whistle-blower-breaks-his-silence-1.14598 . Dwyer, Sonya Corbin, and Jennifer L. Buckle. 2009. “The Space Between: On Being an InsiderOutsider in Qualitative Research.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 8, no. 1: 55–63. Eryomin, Alexei L. 1998. “Information Ecology – a Viewpoint.” International Journal of Environmental Studies, vol. 54, no. 3, 4: 241–253. DOI: 10.1080/00207239808711157.

192 

 7 References

Fackler, Martin. 2014. “Japan Center Questions Stem Cell Breakthrough.” 2014. The New York Times (April 1, 2014). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/ world/asia/japan-center-casts-doubt-on-stem-cell-breakthrough.html . Fitzgerald, Des, and Felicity Callard. 2014. “Social Science and Neuroscience beyond Interdisciplinarity: Experimental Entanglements.” Theory, Culture & Society 0 (0) (June 2014): 1–30. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1177/02632764144537319. Forsythe, Diana E. 1999. “ ‘It’s Just a Matter of Common Sense’: Ethnography as Invisible Work.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work, vol. 8: 127–145. Frow, Emma K. 2012. “Drawing a Line: Setting Guidelines for Digital Image Processing in Scientific Journal Articles.” Social Studies of Science, vol. 42, no. 3: 369–392. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://sss.sagepub.com/content/42/3/369.abstract . “Gel Slicing and Dicing: A Recipe for Disaster.” 2004. Nature Cell Biology, vol. 6, no. 4 (April 2004): 275. Garfinkel, Susan. 2012. “A Research Misconduct Case: 10 Years of Bad Behavior.” Office of Research Integrity Newsletter, vol. 21, no. 1 (December 2012): 3–5. Gilbert, Natasha. 2009. “Science Journals Crack Down on Image Manipulation.” Nature News (October 9, 2009). Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1038/news.2009.991 . Gleicher, Michael, Danielle Albers, Rick Walter, Ilir Jusufi, Charles D. Hansen, and Jonathan C. Roberts. 2011. “Visual Comparison for Information Visualization.” Information Visualization Journal, vol. 10, no. 4: 289–309. DOI: 10.1177/1473871611416549. Accessed: November 6, 2015. Grünewald, Dietrich. 2010. “Bilddidaktik”. In Bildkompetenz – Aufgaben stellen. Kunst + Unterricht 341. http://www.friedrich-verlag.de/shop/sekundarstufe/aesthetische-faecher/ kunst/kunst-und-unterricht/bildkompetenz-aufgaben-stellen?___SID=U. Accessed: January 7, 2016. Heumann, Ina, and Axel C. Hüntelmann. 2013. “Bildtatsachen. Visuelle Praktiken der Wissenschaft”. Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Special Issue: Bildtatsachen, vol. 36, no. 4: 283–293. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1002/bewi.201301647 . Hirschauer, Stefan. 2001. “Ethnographisches Schreiben und die Schweigsamkeit des Sozialen. Zu einer Methodologie der Beschreibung”. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, vol. 30, no. 6 (December 2001): 429–451. Hobohm, Hans-Christoph. 2011. “Auf dem Weg zu den Paradiesen des visuellen Web 3.0”. (Einführungsvortrag zum zweiten Potsdamer “I-Science Tag”, March 22, 2011), Information. Wissenschaft und Praxis, vol. 62, no. 5: 255–259. Hwang, Woo Suk et al. 2004. “Evidence of a Pluripotent Human Embryonic Stem Cell Line Derived from a Cloned Blastocyst.” Science, vol. 303, no. 5664: 1669–1674. Accessed: November 6, 2015. DOI: 10.1126/science.1094515 (Retracted). Hwang, Woo Suk et al. 2005. “Patient-Specific Embryonic Stem Cells Derived from Human SCNT Blastocysts.” Science, vol. 308, no. 5729: 1777–1783. Accessed: November 6, 2015. DOI: 10.1126/science.1112286 (Retracted). “Image Rights and Wrongs.” Nature Nanotechnology Editorial, vol. 5 (September 2010): 627. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI:10.1038/nnano.2010.184 http://www.nature.com/ nnano/journal/v5/n9/full/nnano.2010.184.html . Johnson, Micah K., and Hany Farid. 2006. “Exposing Digital Forgeries in Scientific Images.” MM&Sec‚ 06th Proceedings of the 8th workshop on Multimedia and Security, 29–36. Kandel, Sean, Jeffrey Heer, Catherine Plaisant, Jessie Kennedy, Frank von Ham, Nathalie Henry Riche, Chris Weaver, Bongshin Lee, Dominique Brodbeck, and Paolo Buono. 2011.



7.2 Journal Articles and Online Resources 

 193

“Research Directions in Data Wrangling: Visualizations and Transformations for Usable and Credible Data.” Information Visualization Journal, vol. 10, no. 4: 271–288. Accessed: November 6, 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1473871611415994. Kelleher, Christa, and Thorsten Wagener. 2011. “Ten Guidelines for Effective Data Visualization in Scientific Publications.” Environmental Modelling & Software (2011). Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.12.006 . Knorr Cetina, Karin D., and Klaus Amann. 1990. “Image Dissection in Natural Scientific Inquiry”, Science, Technology and Human Values 15(3); 259–283. Lassiter, Luke Eric. 2005. “Collaborative Ethnography and Public Anthropology.” Current Anthropology (February 2005), vo. 46, no. 1: 83–106. Accessed: March 8, 2016. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/425658. Marcus, George E. 2010. “Contemporary Fieldwork Aesthetics in Art and Anthropology: Experiments in Collaboration and Intervention.” Visual Anthropology, vol. 23, no. 4: 263–277. DOI: 101080/08949468.2010.484988 . Accessed: January 7, 2016. Marcus, George E. 1995. “Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography.” Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 24: 95–117. Accessed: March, 18, 2015. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155931. Martin, Cathie, and Mike Blatt. 2013. “Manipulation and Misconduct in the Handling of Image Data.” The Plant Cell (September 2013), vol. 25, no. 9: 3147–3148. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.plantcell.org/content/25/9/3147.full#ref-2. McVeigh, Karen. 2009. “The Monkeys with Three Parents that could stop Mothers Passing on Incurable Diseases.” The Guardian (August 26, 2009). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/aug/26/monkeys-genetics-dna-mitochondria-disease. Mi-Young, Ahn, and Dennis Normile. 2015. “Stem Cell Pioneer Joins Forces with Stem Cell Fraudster.” Science AAAS (February 10, 2015). American Association for the Advancement of Science. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/02/ stem-cell-pioneer-joins-forces-stem-cell-fraudster. Mitalipov, Shoukhrat et al. 2013. “Human Embryonic Stem Cells Derived by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer.” Cell, vol. 153, no. 6 (June 6, 2013): 1228–1238. Accessed: November 6, 2015. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867413005710. Monahan, Torin, and Jill A. Fisher. 2010. “Benefits of ‘Observer Effects’: Lessons from the Field.” Qualitative Reseach (June 2010), vol. 10, no. 3: 357–376. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1468794110362874. Morton, Christopher. 2005. “The Anthropologist as Photographer: Reading the Monograph and Reading the Archive.” Visual Anthropology, vol. 18, no. 4 (September 2006): 389 – 405. Morus, Iwan Rhys. 2006. “Seeing and Believing Science.” Isis, vol. 97, no. 1 (March 2006): 101–110. Stable URL: http//www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/501103. Accessed: October 26, 2015. Newman, Anthony. 2013. “The Art of Detecting Data and Image Manipulation.” Elsevier Editors’ Update, vol. 41 (November 4, 2013). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://editorsupdate. elsevier.com/issue-41-november-2013/the-art-of-detecting-data-and-image-manipulation/. Niewöhner, Jörg. 2015. “Epigenetics: localizing biology through co-laboration.” New Genetics and Society, vol. 34, no. 2: 219–242. Accessed: March 8, 2016. DOI: 10.1080/14636778.2015.1036154 .

194 

 7 References

Normile, Dennis. 2014a. “High-Profile Stem Cell Papers Under Fire.” (February 17, 2014). Science AAAS. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/02/high-profile-stem-cell-papers-under-fire. Normile, Dennis. 2014b. “RIKEN to Check 20,000 Papers for Doctored Images and Plagiarism.” (May 5, 2014). Science AAAS. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2014/05/ riken-check-20000-papers-doctored-images-and-plagiarism. “Not Picture-perfect.” Nature Editorial, vol. 439 (February 2006): 891–892. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v439/n7079/full/439891b.html . Obokata, Haruko, Teruhiko Wakayama, Yoshihiki Sasai, Koji Kojima, Martin P. Vacanti, Hitoshi Niwa, Masayuki Yamato, and Charles A. Vacanti. 2014. “Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency.” Nature 505 (January 2014): 641–647. DOI: 10.1038/ nature 12968 (Retracted). Parrish, Debra, and Bridget Noonan. 2009. “Image Manipulation as Research Misconduct.” Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 15 (2009): 161–167. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-008-9108-z. Pearson, Helen. 2005. “CSI: cell biology.” Nature News Feature, vol. 434 (April 2005): 952–953. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI:10.1038/434952a. Pink, Sarah. 2003. “Interdisciplinary Agendas in Visual Research: Re-situating Visual Anthropology.” Visual Studies, vol. 18, no. 2 (published online June 2010): 179–192. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1472586031 0001632029. Pretorius, A. Johannes, and Jarke J. Van Wijk. 2009. “What does the User Want to See? What do the Data Want to Be?” Information Visualization Journal, vol. 8, no. 3 (June 4, 2009): 153–166. Accessed: November 6, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/ivs.2009.13 . Rasko, John, and Carl Power. 2015. “What Pushes Scientists to Lie? The Disturbing but Familiar Story of Haruko Obokata.” The Guardian (Febuary 18, 2015). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/feb/18/haruko-obokata-stap-cellscontroversy-scientists-lie. Redi, Judith A., and Ingrid Heynderickx. 2012. “Image Integrity and Aesthetics: Towards a More Encompassing Definition of Visual Quality.” SPIE Proceedings, vol. 8291 (21 February 2012), Human Vision and Electronic Imaging XVII. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http:// proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=1283444. Rossner, Mike. 2007. “Hwang Case Review Committee Misses the Mark.” The Journal of Cell Biology Editorial, vol. 176 (January 8, 2007), no. 2: 131–132. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://jcb.rupress.org/content/176/2/131.full.pdf . Rossner, Mike. 2006. “How to Guard Against Image Fraud.” The Scientist (March 1, 2006). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/ articleNo/23749/title/. Rossner, Mike. 2004. “What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation.” The Journal of Cell Biology Feature, vol. 166, no. 1: 11–15. Accessed: May 19, 2014. DOI: 10.1083/ jcb.200406019 . Sachs-Hombach, Klaus. 2005. “Arguments in Favour of a General Image Science.” IMAGE Journal of Interdisciplinary Image Science, vol. 1: 20–29. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.gib.uni-tuebingen.de/own/journal/pdf/buch_image1.pdf . Sang-Hun, Choe. 2009. “Disgraced Cloning Expert Convicted in South Korea.” The New York Times (October 26, 2009). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nytimes. com/2009/10/27/world/asia/27clone.html?_r=0.



7.2 Journal Articles and Online Resources 

 195

Scholz, Martin. 2010. “Versprechen. Bilder, die Zukunft zeigen”. IMAGE Journal of Interdisciplinary Image Science, Bild und Transformation, vol. 12 (July 2010): 105–112. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.gib.unituebingen.de/own/journal/pdf/buch_ image12.pdf . “Science Editorial Statement Concerning Stem Cell Manuscripts by Woo Suk Hwang, et al.” 2006. Science Magazine (January 12, 2006). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http:// sciencemag.org/site/feature/misc/webfeat/hwang2005/science_statement.pdf . Schirra, Jörg R. J. 2012. “Sind Bilder ein Gegenstand der Informatik? Überlegungen zur Computervisualistik”. (online resource) Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://jrjs.bplaced.net/www/ Work/Papers/P12/P12-1/index.html . Skeels, Meredith, Lee Bongshin, Greg Smith, and George G. Robertson. 2010. “Revealing Uncertainty for Information Visualization.” Information Visualization Journal, vol. 9, no. 1: 70–81. Accessed: November 6, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/ivs.2009.1 . Smyth, Diane. 2015. “Image Manipulation hits World Press Photo.” British Journal of Photography (February 12, 2015). Accessed: January 30, 2016. http://www.bjp-online. com/2015/02/image-manipulation-hits-world-press-photo/. Sparkes, Andrew C. 1997. “Ethnographic Fiction and Representing the Absent Other.” Sport, Education and Society, vol. 2, no. 1: 25–40. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www. tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1357332970020102. “Spot Checks.” 2007. Nature Immunology Editorial, vol. 8 (March 2007), no. 3: 215. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.nature.com/ni/journal/v8/n3/full/ni0307-215.html . Stockrahm, Sven, Lydia Klöckner, and Dagny Lüdemann. 2013. “Zellbiologe gibt Fehler in Klonstudie zu”. Zeit online, (May 23, 2013). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.zeit. de/wissen/gesundheit/2013-05/klonen-studie-fehler-mitalipov-reaktion. Thiemeyer, Thomas. 2011. “Die Sprache der Dinge. Museumsobjekte zwischen Zeichen und Erscheinung”. Online-Publikation der Beiträge des Symposiums “Geschichtsbilder im Museum” im Deutschen Historischen Museum Berlin (Februar 2011). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.museenfuergeschichte.de/downloads/news/Thomas_ Thiemeyer-Die_Sprache_der_Dinge.pdf . Tucker, Jennifer. 2006. “The Historian, The Picture, and the Archive.” Isis, vol. 97, no. 1: 111–120. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://wesscholar.wesleyan.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1026&context=div2facpubs. Vande Moere, Andrew, and Helen Purchase. 2011. “On the Role of Design in Information Visualization.” Information Visualization Journal, vol. 10, no. 4: 356–371. Accessed: October 26, 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1473871611415996. Vrasti, Wanda. 2010. “Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying about Methodology and Love Writing.” Millennium – Journal of International Studies, vol. 39, no. 1: 79–88. Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://mil.sagepub.com/content/39/1/79.abstract Wietschorke, Jens. 2010. “Historische Ethnografie: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen eines Konzepts”. Zeitschrift für Volkskunde, vol. 106, no. 2 (2010): 197–224. Wise, M. Norton. 2006. “Making Visible.” Isis, vol. 97, no. 1: 75–82. Accessed: October 26, 2015. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/501101. Wolbert, Barbara. 2000. “The anthropologist as photographer: The visual construction of ethnographic authority.” Visual Anthropology, vol. 13, no. 4: 321–343. DOI: 1080/08949468.2000.9966807 . Yamaguchi, Mari. 2014. “Yoshiki Sasai Dies At 52; Japanese Scientist Was Embroiled In Stem-Cell Research Scandal.” Huffington Post (May 8, 2014). Accessed: October 26, 2015.

196 

 7 References

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/05/yoshiki-sasai-dies-japanese-scientiststem-cell-research-scandal_n_5649791.html . Zinkant, Kathrin. 2005. “Aus der Traum”. ZEIT online (December 15, 2005). Accessed: October 26, 2015. http://www.zeit.de/online/2005/51/hwang_faelschung.

8 Appendixes 8.1 Table of Figures Fig. 1 Glass Sponges. Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, Golm. Photograph Kerstin Kühl, 2012   3 A “Lunch Talk” at the central laboratory. Photograph TB, 2013   4 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 Offering food at “Lunch Talk.” Photograph TB, 2013   5 Fig. 4 Image Flyer produced for base project “Shaping Knowledge.” ­Photograph ­Alexander Struck & TB, 2013   6 Fig. 5 Researcher Michael Dürfeld in front of series of roll containers (the “Bite”) at the central laboratory. Photograph TB, 2013   7 Fig. 6 Lecture held at the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on September 3, 2013. Photograph TB   11 Fig. 7 Waiting for a “Lunch Talk”- Presentation at the Interdisciplinary ­Laboratory on September 23, 2014. Photograph TB   17 Fig. 8 Elements for a planning model at the “Experimental Zone” of Interdisciplinary Laboratory. Photograph TB, 2015   20 Fig. 9 Negative form of a Cluster Cup: object collected from a trash bin at the ­laboratory. Photograph TB, 2013   21 Fig. 10 “Laboratory Talks” during the exhibition “Speaking Images – Speaking of Images.” Photograph TB, January 30, 2014   23 Fig. 11 Group discussion: “Laboratory Talks” during the exhibition “Speaking Images” on January 9, 2014. Photograph TB   24 Fig. 12 Photo collage mixed with comic elements. Detail from exhibition poster - “Speaking Images – Speaking of Images.” Collage and ­photograph, TB 2013   25 Fig. 13 Images in the making: Image production for the exhibition. Photograph TB, 2013   26 Fig. 14 & 15 Exhibition posters: Deborah Zehnder (left) and Carola Becker (right), 2013   27 Fig. 16 Collaborative work. Photograph TB, 2013   35 Fig. 17 Joint work. Photograph TB   36 Fig. 18 Carola Zwick: “You have to listen carefully to the materials you are working with!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015   58 Fig. 19 A final design product: detailed view of Setu Chair. 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller   59 Fig. 20 Andreas Pinkow: “Images are like music – good images produce an enjo­yable sound.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015   61 Fig. 21 “A Journey around the World.” 2008. Original Sketch of the Urban Planet ­Pavilion, EXPO 2010. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow   63 Fig. 22 Marc Tamschick: “Developing design is like an endless organic process.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015   64 Fig. 23 Anouk Hoffmeister: “Communicating with images is more efficient than ­communicating with words alone.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   66

198 

 8 Appendixes

Fig. 24 Gregor Hagedorn: “It is most important to check whether images ­represent  70 data correctly.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015  Fig. 25 Carola Becker: “Beautiful images are a strong currency in the academic world.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015   72 Fig. 26 Histological section: Ovaries of a pea crab. Carola Becker, 2005   73 Fig. 27 Regine Hengge: “Being exposed to art is constant visual training.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2015   74 Fig. 28 Hannelore Hoch: “People who use drawings have many more words for the things they observe.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   75 Fig. 29 Hannelore Hoch at work with the camera lucida. Photograph Dr. Manfred Asche, 2014   78 Fig. 30 Friederike Saxe: “Scientists need to pay close attention to how images are produced!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   79 Fig. 31 Angela Boesl: “Every creation is unique in its own way.” Collage, ­photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   82 Fig. 32 Bodo Baumunk: “Images are a result of human creative expression – they are intentionally shaped.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   84 Fig. 33 Horst Bredekamp: “Images drive people to action!” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   86 Fig. 34 Theresia Ziehe: “What characterizes images is their openness. One should better not explain them ad nauseam.” Collage, photograph and digital ­processing: TB, 2016   88 Fig. 35 Christian Stein: “Images mediate between object and viewer.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   91 Fig. 36 Jürgen Feige: “Taking a good photograph takes a lot of time and effort.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   93 Fig. 37 Andreas Lange: “Images in a computer museum are intrinsically linked to aspects. of time and motion.” Collage, photograph and digital ­processing: TB, 2015   95 Fig. 38 Alexander Struck: “A good scholarly image visualizes data and makes them ­understandable, it conveys information and provides a context for its interpretation.” Collage, photograph and digital processing: TB, 2016   97 Fig. 39 The “Sundeck-Installation” in the exhibition “Wealth – more than enough” at the Hygienemuseum Dresden. Andreas Pinkow, 2013   121 Fig. 40 Creating the workspace of the future: the Metaform Portfolio by 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller   122 Fig. 41 WipEout HD 3D (Sony Computer Entertainment, 2010) at the Museum of ­Computer Games. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of ­Computer Games Berlin   127 Fig. 42 Concept Sketch (Scan). Christian Stein, 2014   132 Fig. 43 Sketch for network graph by Alexander Struck. Photograph TB, 2015   133 Fig. 44 Concept Sketch: “Vision – Emotion – Tradition” (Scan). Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow.    134 Figs. 45 – 47 Sketches of the Urban Planet Pavilion, EXPO 2010. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow   135



Fig. 48

8.1 Table of Figures 

 199

Design elements of a development cycle from 7.5 studios: presentation on open house day of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory on June 8, 2013. ­Photograph TB   136 Fig. 49 Mirra Chair by 7.5 studios. Courtesy of Herman Miller   137 Fig. 50 Goniobenna hypermedusa. Drawings of the genital tract of a cicada. Drawn with the help of a camera lucida, Hannelore Hoch, 2006/2007   139 Fig. 51 Computer Game Milestones at the Museum of Computer Games. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of Computer Games Berlin   140 Fig. 52 Game sequence from World of Warcraft. Screenshot Jan-Ole Christian, 2007   141 Fig. 53 Documentary photography: Fashion 1921. Alice Hechy. “Kleid mit angelegter Glocke.” University of Applied Arts and Sciences Berlin, after 1921. ­Photograph Dr. Franz Stoedtner, Berlin. FB 5. Historical Archive from the ­textbook collection of the state school of weaving. Inventory No.: CC-BY-SA 4.0. University of Applied Arts and Sciences, Berlin   142 Fig. 54 The pedagogic aspect of image work: Student exhibition at University of Applied Arts and Sciences, Berlin. Photograph TB, 2014   143 Figs. 55 – 58 Digital visualization tool. Theresia Ziehe, 2014   145; 146 Fig. 59 Sketch for exhibition “Darwin and Darwinism” at the Hygiene-Museum Dresden, 1994. Courtesy of Bodo Baumunk   149 Fig. 60 Exhibition view: “Darwin and Darwinism” at the Hygiene-Museum Dresden, 1994. Courtesy of Deutsches Hygiene-Museum. Photograph Volker Kreidler, 1994   150 Fig. 61 Hauptfilm des Nationalparkzentrums Berchtesgaden. TAMSCHICK MEDIA+SPACE GMBH, 2013   155 Fig. 62 Male internal reproductive structures of european pea crabs (image with cutting artifact). Carola Becker, 2010   161 Fig. 63 Male internal reproductive structures of european pea crabs (Crustacea, ­Decapoda, Brachyura, Pinnotheridae): Vas deferens morphology and ­spermatozoal ultrastructure (image with cutting artifact erased). Carola Becker, Sebastian Klaus, Christopher C. Tudge, 2013. Courtesy of John Wiley and Sons   163 Fig. 64 Pie chart “Biodiversity.” Gregor Hagedorn, 2001   168 Fig. 65 Exhibition view: “Wildnis(t)räume” – Nationalparkzentrum Eifel, 2013. Courtesy of Andreas Pinkow   170 Fig. 66 Sketch for the exhibition „Life after Luther. A Cultural History of the Evangelical Parsonage.“ (25 October 2013 to 2 March 2014) Bodo Baumunk, 2013   171 Fig. 67 Computer Space Machine (Nutting 1971), the first commercialized computer game displayed in the Museum of Computer Games in Berlin. Photograph Jörg Metzner, 2011. Museum of Computer Games Berlin   173 Fig. 68 Table: Journal editors’ perspectives on image manipulation   181 Fig. 69 The blood-brain barrier in a live zebrafish embryo. Photograph by Dr. Jennifer L. Peters and Dr. Michael R. Taylor, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, 2012. Courtesy of Dr. Jennifer L. Peters and Dr. Michael R. Taylor   184

200 

 8 Appendixes

8.2 Interview Questionnaires



8.2 Interview Questionnaires 

 201

Sample - Questionnaire “Asking the Editors”

Questions: 1) How does the popularization of image editing software change the scholarly use of images?

202 

 8 Appendixes

2) (Since when -) Does your journal provide guidelines concerning image manipulation?

3) Where do you see the boundary between legitimate image editing and levels of manipulation that become fraud?

4) Do you think guidelines are an appropriate means for preventing illegitimate image manipulations? Where do you see the limitations of guidelines?

5) What additional rules or measures would help to ensure image integrity?

6) Does visual literacy influence the control over visual information?

7) From an editor’s perspective: What major intellectual challenges do you see when it comes to the publication of images? For example…

Thank you very much for your participation!

University data protection regulations require me to ask you to agree explicitly that I may use your answers in an anonymized form in my dissertation and subsequent book.

___________________ Date, Place, Signature



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

 203

8.3 List of Abbreviations CSE ORI AAAS NPPA WPP

Council of Science Editors Office of Research Integrity American Association for the Advancement of Science United States National Press Photographers Association World Press Photo

8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes Farbe

Obercode

Code

Alle Codings

●

Emoticons

0

●

3 (Bild)-Produktion

5

●

4 Bildgebrauch

8

●

2 Theoretisches Verständnis 1 Ethnography between the Lines 5 Manipulation/Standards 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation Interviewee

43

Interviewer

13

Allgemein

0

Ikonische Bilder

3

Bildbegriff

5

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

1 Ethnography between the Lines 1 Ethnography between the Lines 2 Theoretisches Verständnis 2 Theoretisches Verständnis 2 Theoretisches Verständnis 2 Theoretisches Verständnis 2 Theoretisches Verständnis 2 Theoretisches Verständnis

Mentale Bilder/Vorstellung Grenzen bildlicher Wissensvermittlung Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder

51 55 58 7

18 39 41

Erstellt am 26.06.2015 11:16:13 11.06.2015 10:15:44 03.06.2015 16:29:53 11.06.2015 10:14:37 11.06.2015 10:18:34 03.06.2015 16:35:21 16.06.2015 14:35:17 18.06.2015 09:29:13 16.06.2015 10:08:11 24.06.2015 17:32:55 19.06.2015 09:38:43 18.06.2015 15:49:03 16.06.2015 12:25:59 11.06.2015 11:03:53 10.06.2015 14:59:35

Dokumente 0 5 5 14 15 15 10 4 9 0 2 4 6 13 16

204 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

●

3 (Bild)-Produktion Allgemein

0

●

3 (Bild)-Produktion Beeinflussende Faktoren

7

●

4 Bildgebrauch

Zwecke

7

●

Formen der Manipulation

6

Manipulationen erkennen

6

●

5 Manipulation/ Standards 5 Manipulation/ Standards 5 Manipulation/ Standards 5 Manipulation/ Standards 5 Manipulation/ Standards 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation 6 Bildwirkung/-interpretation Allgemein

●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Code

Alle Codings

Zweck von Manipulationen Standards/Richtlinien

17

Einstellung zu Manipulation Interpretation

80

39

0

Meinung/Urteil

0

Wirkung

1

Bildkompetenz

8

Sehen/Beobachten

66 1

Allgemein

Bilderverbot/bildferne Kultur Einstellung/Haltung

●

Allgemein

Bilder naturnah

2

●

Allgemein

Analog - Digital

6

●

Allgemein

Trends

7

●

Allgemein

Analoge Bildproduktion

18

●

Allgemein

Kunst vs. Wissenschaft

22

●

Allgemein

Digitale Bildproduktion

30

●

Allgemein

Ziel/Mission/Intention

35

1

Erstellt am 15.06.2015 15:16:39 18.06.2015 14:45:09 11.06.2015 10:55:23 19.06.2015 10:35:35 19.06.2015 11:06:12 11.06.2015 14:25:39 03.06.2015 16:29:12 11.06.2015 14:11:01 24.06.2015 17:44:42 24.06.2015 17:46:37 24.06.2015 17:45:15 18.06.2015 16:09:15 10.06.2015 13:46:02 19.06.2015 16:10:25 23.06.2015 15:23:13 19.06.2015 15:49:35 18.06.2015 09:18:46 12.06.2015 11:52:06 15.06.2015 11:00:21 17.06.2015 09:39:44 10.06.2015 13:39:07 11.06.2015 14:27:44

Dokumente 0 4 4 4 2 9 13 16 0 0 1 4 14 1 1 2 4 5 6 9 12 12



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Allgemein

Arbeitsprozess

72

●

Allgemein

Selbstverständnis

76

●

Analoge Bildproduktion Analoge Bildproduktion Analoge Bildproduktion Analoge Bildproduktion Analoge Bildproduktion Analoge Bildproduktion Analogfotographie

Dia-Doppelprojektion

1

Produktdesign

1

Camera Lucida

1

Whiteboard

2

● ● ●

Alle Codings

Analogfotographie

10

Zeichnen

44

Vintages

2

Manipulation = Mittel zum Zweck Manipulation als Blickführung Versuch - Irrtum

4

●

Angemessene Manipulation Angemessene Manipulation Arbeitsprozess

●

Arbeitsprozess

Bild-/Datenverwaltung

5

●

Arbeitsprozess

Szenographie

8

●

Arbeitsprozess

Künstlerischer Zugang

9

●

Arbeitsprozess

Auswahl

10

●

Arbeitsprozess

Kreative Bildproduktion

11

●

Arbeitsprozess

Original - Reproduktion

12

●

Arbeitsprozess

Bilder im Museum

13

●

Arbeitsprozess

Pragmatik

19

●

Arbeitsprozess

Produktion/Werkzeuge

72

●

Beeinflussende Faktoren

Intuition

● ● ● ● ●

7 2

6

Erstellt am 15.06.2015 12:55:55 15.06.2015 12:56:35 23.06.2015 16:48:38 15.06.2015 13:38:12 15.06.2015 11:10:34 18.06.2015 09:51:28 22.06.2015 10:28:19 03.06.2015 16:38:41 22.06.2015 14:38:01 19.06.2015 15:11:39 19.06.2015 10:34:27 16.06.2015 10:16:40 23.06.2015 13:16:43 16.06.2015 14:03:30 16.06.2015 10:47:19 15.06.2015 10:01:10 16.06.2015 09:45:11 22.06.2015 13:01:10 16.06.2015 12:20:04 10.06.2015 14:12:23 10.06.2015 13:55:07 11.06.2015 10:22:35

 205

Dokumente 11 12 1 1 1 2 2 12 1 2 3 2 2 1 4 6 4 4 6 9 15 5

206 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Bildsprache

●

Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beeinflussende Faktoren Beispiel/Veranschaulichung Beispiel/Veranschaulichung Bild - Objekt

●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Alle Codings 7

Handwerk/Denken mit Hand Kosten/Aufwand/Marktlogik Authentizität

17

Skills/fehlende Skills

48

Gestaltung

94

Ästhetik/Geschmacksurteil Story Namen

24 32

139 4 56 6

Bildbegriff

Exponat/Sammlungsgegenstand Definitionen

●

Bildbegriff

Terminologie

6

●

Bildbegriff

Das bewegte Bild

9

●

Bildbegriff

Das digitale Bild

18

●

Bilder - Sprache

11

●

Bilder im Museum

Unterschied Bild Sprache Recherche

●

Bilder im Museum

●

Bilder im Museum

●

Bildkompetenz

●

Bildkompetenz

●

Bildkompetenz

●

Biographisches/ Persönliches

Bewahren/Konservatorisches Ausstellung als Bild/ Begriffsallegorie Fehlende Ausbildung Visual Literacy/Professionality Lehren & Lernen Duzen

3

5 6 7 2 12 35 1

Erstellt am 16.06.2015 14:24:56 16.06.2015 10:01:14 12.06.2015 15:17:53 16.06.2015 15:07:01 10.06.2015 13:51:32 03.06.2015 17:08:50 10.06.2015 13:47:41 22.06.2015 10:38:11 16.06.2015 14:37:13 19.06.2015 13:57:10 18.06.2015 16:11:22 15.06.2015 09:33:19 17.06.2015 10:33:27 19.06.2015 14:00:57 18.06.2015 14:10:56 22.06.2015 14:22:15 22.06.2015 11:00:45 23.06.2015 13:12:50 23.06.2015 17:37:32 10.06.2015 14:39:13 03.06.2015 17:09:37 19.06.2015 13:51:32

Dokumente 5 7 8 8 14 17 16 2 9 3 3 4 6 6 6 3 1 1 1 8 13 1



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Prägung

●

Biographisches/ Persönliches Das bewegte Bild

Sound

1

●

Definitionen

Bild - Denkinstrument

1

●

Definitionen

1

●

Definitionen

Einstellung zu Definitionen Bild - Oberbegriff

●

Definitionen

Bild - Zeichen

2

●

Definitionen

Bild - Manifestation

4

●

Definitionen

Bild - Zweidimensional

4

●

Definitionen

Bild - Akteur/Agent

5

●

Definitionen

5

●

Definitionen

Bild - Medium/Kommunikationsform Bild - Abbild

●

Definitionen

Bild - Kunst

6

●

Definitionen

Erweiterter Bildbegriff

6

●

Definitionen

Bild - Objekt

7

●

Definitionen

Bild - Daten

11

●

Definitionen

Bild - Werkzeug

11

●

Definitionen

Bilder - Sprache

15

●

Definitionen

Bild - Informationsträger

42

●

Definitionen

Bild - Text

49

●

Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion

Infrarotreflektographie

1

Color Proofing

1

World of Warcraft

1

● ●

Alle Codings 12

2

6

Erstellt am 22.06.2015 14:10:26 19.06.2015 14:45:57 25.06.2015 11:20:46 18.06.2015 16:09:52 12.06.2015 10:46:43 19.06.2015 09:51:04 16.06.2015 09:32:16 23.06.2015 14:47:14 17.06.2015 09:43:19 18.06.2015 15:48:27 15.06.2015 09:29:30 15.06.2015 09:31:14 15.06.2015 12:52:13 18.06.2015 09:17:14 12.06.2015 11:07:00 15.06.2015 12:52:40 12.06.2015 15:19:04 15.06.2015 09:32:27 16.06.2015 09:37:36 23.06.2015 17:28:32 23.06.2015 17:00:57 22.06.2015 09:32:45

 207

Dokumente 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 3 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 8 10 11 1 1 1

208 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion

Google Glass

1

Fraps/Mitschnittprogramm World of Warcraft Petrinetze/Graphen

1

Autographer

1

D3 Data Driven Documents Piwik/Google Analytics

1

Netzwerkvisualisierung

1

Latech/Scribus

1

Adobe Cooler

1

InDesign

1

Grafiken

1

3-D Scan

1

Voxel

1

Film

1

Compositing Tools

1

Gels und Western Blots

1

Screenshots

2

VUE Diagramme

2

Programmiersprache R

2

Processing

2

Renderings

2

Micro-CT

2

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Alle Codings

1

1

Erstellt am 22.06.2015 09:28:24 19.06.2015 14:47:41 19.06.2015 10:23:05 19.06.2015 10:08:00 19.06.2015 10:07:27 18.06.2015 20:26:27 18.06.2015 09:50:41 18.06.2015 09:38:17 17.06.2015 13:04:45 17.06.2015 12:07:33 17.06.2015 12:02:04 17.06.2015 11:13:27 17.06.2015 10:29:24 16.06.2015 14:24:13 16.06.2015 10:09:28 15.06.2015 09:35:56 19.06.2015 14:47:05 19.06.2015 10:03:08 18.06.2015 09:49:29 17.06.2015 12:02:28 15.06.2015 13:10:01 15.06.2015 10:44:54

Dokumente 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Digitale Wandabwicklung

3

Automatisiert

3

Animation/Simulation

3

Photoshop

5

Keynote Powerpoint

7

Illustrator

8

●

Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitale Bildproduktion Digitalisieren

●

Dokumentation

9

●

Einstellung zu Definitionen Einstellung zu Definitionen Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Manipulation Einstellung zu Richtlinien Emoticons

Bildunterschriften Publikation/Objektlabel Bildbegriff nicht relevant Kann nicht definieren

4

= Neutral

2

Manipulation und Bild untrennbar = Negativ

4

= Positiv

7

Ethik

7

● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Emoticons

Alle Codings

Digitale Fotographie

10

Ausstellen

12

3

5

Angemessene Manipulation Grenzfälle

11

Illegitime Manipulation

29

15

Nachfrage: Was sind Regeln? Lachtränen

1

Idee

1

1

Erstellt am 22.06.2015 14:43:31 18.06.2015 14:05:49 17.06.2015 10:37:34 17.06.2015 12:07:15 17.06.2015 11:30:43 17.06.2015 11:35:47 12.06.2015 12:12:21 19.06.2015 14:02:48 19.06.2015 10:31:07 17.06.2015 10:51:22 22.06.2015 10:07:47 19.06.2015 15:12:41 22.06.2015 15:24:44 19.06.2015 10:32:09 19.06.2015 10:41:37 22.06.2015 10:25:29 11.06.2015 10:24:43 12.06.2015 11:58:11 10.06.2015 13:43:29 19.06.2015 10:26:25 16.06.2015 15:36:02 17.06.2015 10:11:20

 209

Dokumente 1 2 2 2 4 2 7 5 5 2 4 2 2 4 5 4 7 10 10 1 1 1

210  Farbe

 8 Appendixes

Obercode

Code

Emoticons

lächelnd

1

Emoticons

lachend

1

Emoticons

beschämt

1

●

Emoticons

bestürzt

5

●

Emoticons

Information

16

●

Emoticons

erstaunt

19

●

Typo

1

Logo

1

Verhüllen

1

Petersburger Hängung

3

Licht

4

Label/Info

5

Farbe/Form

25

●

Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Formen von Gestaltung Gestaltung

Definition von Gestaltung

1

●

Gestaltung

Mittel zum Denken

3

●

Gestaltung

4

●

Gestaltung

Gestaltung spielt keine Rolle Regeln der Gestaltung

●

Gestaltung

Formen von Gestaltung

6

●

Gestaltung

Angemessenheit

12

●

Gestaltung

Wirkung von Gestaltung

12

●

Gestaltung

Gestalterische Freiheit/ Grenzen

13

● ● ● ● ● ●

Alle Codings

4

Erstellt am 19.06.2015 12:03:15 22.06.2015 11:24:07 23.06.2015 11:50:03 10.06.2015 14:35:07 10.06.2015 14:36:26 10.06.2015 14:21:03 17.06.2015 13:03:16 19.06.2015 14:12:04 23.06.2015 13:58:05 22.06.2015 14:53:46 22.06.2015 15:11:34 22.06.2015 14:56:54 16.06.2015 13:09:09 23.06.2015 15:57:15 19.06.2015 10:01:34 22.06.2015 12:39:12 22.06.2015 11:32:14 22.06.2015 14:54:52 22.06.2015 14:28:51 18.06.2015 14:27:52 22.06.2015 14:20:19

Dokumente 1 1 1 5 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 1 2 3 3 4 4 6 3



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Weißes Rauschen

2

16.06.2015 14:05:32

2

Verlust Bildinformation

7

19.06.2015 14:15:22

5

Ergebnisse vortäuschen

1

Daten zusammenfassen

2

Kontextmanipulation/Text

2

Interpretations-Manipulation Verfremdung/Täuschung/ Fälschung Beurteilung(-kriterien)

3

●

Interpretation

Identifikation/Einblick

4

●

Interpretation

Wiedererkennen

5

●

Interpretation

Erwartung

6

●

Interpretation

13

●

Interpretation

Mehrwert/Zusätzliche Bedeutung Interpretationsspielraum

●

Interpretation

Kontextabhängig

33

●

Interviewee

Sprache

0

●

Interviewee

Bezug zu BWG

1

●

Interviewee

Prägung durch Bilder

3

●

Interviewee

Kontrolle

8

●

Interviewee

Unsicherheit

10

●

Interviewee

Nachfrage

21

●

Interviewee

Biographisches/Persönliches

84

19.06.2015 11:05:07 19.06.2015 11:13:48 19.06.2015 11:09:44 19.06.2015 11:10:43 19.06.2015 10:51:19 23.06.2015 12:00:52 23.06.2015 14:51:05 19.06.2015 11:29:15 16.06.2015 15:17:57 19.06.2015 14:11:20 19.06.2015 15:46:55 19.06.2015 11:37:34 26.06.2015 11:21:11 19.06.2015 13:50:54 18.06.2015 16:00:50 16.06.2015 09:27:15 19.06.2015 11:57:25 18.06.2015 14:17:37 10.06.2015 13:48:35

1

●

Grenzen bildlicher Wissensvermittlung Grenzen bildlicher Wissensvermittlung Illegitime Manipulation Illegitime Manipulation Illegitime Manipulation Illegitime Manipulation Illegitime Manipulation Interpretation

●

● ● ● ● ●

Alle Codings

13 1

19

Erstellt am

 211

Dokumente

1 1 3 4 1 1 4 5 4 6 7 0 1 1 5 5 7 16

212 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Interviewee

Meinung/Urteil/Kritik

155

●

Interviewee

156

●

Interviewer

Beispiel/Veranschaulichung Idee

●

Interviewer

Intervention

4

●

Interviewer

Nachfrage/Stichwort

7

●

Kenntnis/Unkenntnis der Richtlinien Kenntnis/Unkenntnis der Richtlinien Konventionen

Gestalterische Regeln Museum Ingenieurswesen/Industrie Leitparadigmen

1

Jugendschutz

1

Bilder aus Konserve

2

Bildrechte

3

Marketing

3

Papierqualität/Material

3

Effizienz

5

Faktor Zeit

6

●

Meinung/Urteil

Erwartung an wissenschaftliches Bild Propaganda/Politische Zensur Was bleibt unsichtbar?

7

●

Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kosten/Aufwand/ Marktlogik Kunst vs. Wissenschaft Meinung/Urteil

●

Meinung/Urteil

6

●

Meinung/Urteil/ Kritik Meinung/Urteil/ Kritik

Simulation/Eindruck von Wissenschaftlichkeit Interdisziplinäre Perspektive Disziplinäre Perspektive

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

●

Alle Codings

1

1 1

3 5

3 16

Erstellt am 10.06.2015 14:38:02 11.06.2015 14:13:48 19.06.2015 13:17:37 19.06.2015 10:23:43 22.06.2015 14:38:55 22.06.2015 15:00:41 19.06.2015 10:18:35 19.06.2015 10:24:29 19.06.2015 15:26:04 19.06.2015 10:11:41 19.06.2015 10:13:52 22.06.2015 13:44:38 23.06.2015 17:02:12 17.06.2015 12:03:42 16.06.2015 10:12:02 19.06.2015 11:53:00 19.06.2015 15:57:13 23.06.2015 16:56:39 19.06.2015 11:55:48 23.06.2015 17:39:18 18.06.2015 14:35:17

Dokumente 17 16 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 1 5



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder Perspektive Gegenwart/ Zukunft Bilder

Bild als Konstante

2

23.06.2015 11:35:00

1

Distanzminderung/ Überwachung

2

26.06.2015 11:08:56

1

Virtuelle Realität

2

22.06.2015 09:34:27

1

Kreatives Kapital

3

16.06.2015 13:54:19

2

Marktwert

3

17.06.2015 10:48:21

2

Umschwung/Bilderarme Epoche

3

23.06.2015 14:33:41

1

Schneller Kommunizieren/Wahrnehmen

6

15.06.2015 12:44:04

3

Wachsende Bedeutung

6

17.06.2015 10:26:47

5

Änderung Sehgewohnheiten

9

17.06.2015 10:31:13

4

Professionalisierung Bildgebrauch

9

15.06.2015 15:10:59

5

Visual Overkill

9

16.06.2015 13:40:46

4

Quantität/Präsenz

10

17.06.2015 13:42:13

7

Wirkung steuern

10

15.06.2015 10:27:16

7

Transformation des Bildlichen

13

19.06.2015 13:20:20

5

Technologische Innovation

35

11.06.2015 15:28:38

12

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Alle Codings

Erstellt am

 213

Dokumente

214 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Publizieren

Digitale Publikation

1

●

Sehgewohnheiten

9

●

Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sehen/ Beobachten Sprache

●

Sprache

Ausdruck/Formulierung

●

Standards/Richtlinien Standards/Richtlinien Standards/Richtlinien Standards/Richtlinien Standards/Richtlinien Standards/Richtlinien

Rolle Editors

1

Regeln Kunstgeschichte

4

Kollegenmeinung

5

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ●

Alle Codings

Kritischer Blick

10

Vertrauen/Gläubigkeit

10

Neugierde

12

Vergleichen

12

Subjektiv - Objektiv

13

Perspektive

20

Produzent - Betrachter

26

Verstehen

28

Assoziation

39

Beschreiben

48

Emotion

58

Vorwissen/Kontexte Zitat

134 4 79

Einstellung zu Richtlinien

12

Kenntnis/Unkenntnis der Richtlinien Konventionen

14 21

Erstellt am 10.06.2015 14:10:26 22.06.2015 13:25:01 17.06.2015 10:09:20 15.06.2015 15:07:35 10.06.2015 14:51:49 17.06.2015 13:38:51 15.06.2015 09:50:09 16.06.2015 14:41:27 15.06.2015 09:47:14 11.06.2015 15:23:06 10.06.2015 14:42:49 10.06.2015 15:03:56 12.06.2015 13:22:39 10.06.2015 13:50:45 26.06.2015 10:54:07 10.06.2015 14:34:45 15.06.2015 10:02:55 26.06.2015 10:11:37 15.06.2015 10:09:22 15.06.2015 13:21:33 10.06.2015 14:00:15 11.06.2015 14:54:53

Dokumente 1 4 5 6 6 7 8 7 12 13 13 12 13 17 1 17 1 1 4 6 6 9



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

●

Dokumentation

●

Standards/Richtlinien Technologische Innovation Technologische Innovation Transformation des Bildlichen Wirkung

●

Alle Codings 43

Moderne Methoden

2

Reproduzierbarkeit

3

Prozesse

1

Bewusstsein ändern

1

Wirkung

Verstärker/Filter

1

●

Wirkung

Resonanz

2

●

Wirkung

Symmetrie

2

●

Wirkung

Faktor Zeit

3

●

Wirkung

Freiheit

6

●

Wirkung

Klarheit

6

●

Wirkung

6

●

Wirkung

●

Wirkung

Verwirrend/Deutung schwer Bilder zeigen sich selbst/ verbergen etwas Sinnlicher Impuls

11

●

Wirkung

Visuelle Effekte/Tricks

15

●

Zeichnen

Notizbuch

1

●

Zeichnen

Material

2

●

Zeichnen

Entwurf

7

●

Zwecke

Beweisen

1

●

Zwecke

Digitalisieren

1

●

Zwecke

Interpretieren

1

●

Zwecke

Repräsentieren

1

● ● ●

7

Erstellt am 11.06.2015 14:09:37 18.06.2015 14:33:47 22.06.2015 10:11:36 19.06.2015 15:08:09 25.06.2015 11:43:56 18.06.2015 15:54:44 23.06.2015 14:17:13 19.06.2015 12:02:40 19.06.2015 11:34:42 19.06.2015 14:19:06 19.06.2015 12:04:24 19.06.2015 11:30:29 17.06.2015 09:38:19 17.06.2015 13:41:14 16.06.2015 14:35:57 17.06.2015 12:09:39 18.06.2015 20:19:11 18.06.2015 20:15:13 23.06.2015 15:17:51 22.06.2015 12:48:38 23.06.2015 11:16:07 18.06.2015 20:09:37

 215

Dokumente 13 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 1 2 3 1 1 1 1

216 

 8 Appendixes

Farbe

Obercode

Code

Alle Codings

●

Zwecke

Untersuchen

1

●

Zwecke

Fühlen

2

●

Zwecke

Illustrieren/Nachzeichnen

2

●

Zwecke

Inspirieren

2

●

Zwecke

Irritieren

2

●

Zwecke

Konkretisieren

2

●

Zwecke

Strukturieren

2

●

Zwecke

Übersetzen

2

●

Zwecke

Aktivieren

3

●

Zwecke

Einordnen

3

●

Zwecke

Reflektieren

3

●

Zwecke

Differenzieren

4

●

Zwecke

Explorieren

4

●

Zwecke

Forschen

7

●

Zwecke

Orientieren/Informieren

7

●

Zwecke

Triggern

7

●

Zwecke

Publizieren

8

●

Zwecke

Überzeugen

10

●

Zwecke

Unterhalten

10

●

Zwecke

Erklären

11

●

Zwecke

Spielen/Interagieren

12

●

Zwecke

Fesseln

13

Erstellt am 23.06.2015 15:17:43 16.06.2015 14:46:39 23.06.2015 13:20:29 17.06.2015 11:25:05 23.06.2015 15:20:20 18.06.2015 20:10:16 25.06.2015 12:02:20 16.06.2015 12:20:54 17.06.2015 09:24:42 18.06.2015 20:20:04 23.06.2015 13:30:40 18.06.2015 20:19:45 18.06.2015 20:08:10 16.06.2015 10:15:45 16.06.2015 14:10:09 16.06.2015 13:51:20 10.06.2015 13:40:43 12.06.2015 11:15:28 12.06.2015 11:16:21 15.06.2015 09:40:13 19.06.2015 14:30:51 16.06.2015 13:20:39

Dokumente 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 5 2 4 4 4 6 9 3 5



8.4 MAXQDA List of Codes 

Farbe

Obercode

Code

Alle Codings

●

Zwecke

Überprüfen

14

●

Zwecke

Werben

15

●

Zwecke

Vergleichen

21

●

Zwecke

Dokumentieren

23

●

Zwecke

Verstehen

23

●

Zwecke

Vermitteln

31

●

Zwecke

38

●

Zwecke

Präsentieren/Kommunizieren Visualisieren

66

Erstellt am 15.06.2015 13:04:04 10.06.2015 13:41:48 15.06.2015 14:50:38 17.06.2015 12:10:26 15.06.2015 10:37:50 12.06.2015 15:05:58 10.06.2015 15:17:13 10.06.2015 14:32:55

 217

Dokumente 6 6 8 7 10 13 14 15