• What is not the Frame?
  • What is thingness of the frame?

Thingness Narrative or Descriptive, the frame was a key component of a representational system dependent on the limitations of its frame.

@Damisch writes, perspective is a “structure of exclusion, the coherence of which is based on a set of refusals”. Not only the painter but the viewer of perspective was Immobilised by the logic of the system[^1]

The question is not about existence existence of The frame, but how we can use the Frame. How we can redesign/register the frame.

What? How? Where? when? why?

The way we spend our time our rhythms.

Reevaluate and investigate the meaning of the things and our immediate environment.

Forgotten value how can reconnect with it.

Omnipresent and the present elicits what could be changed on the other hand scenarios are formulated that don’t aspired to be implemented but contained the seats for possible futures.

Design The basic idea here is that wood (hylein Greek) is a shapeless material to which the artist, the technician, gives form, thereby causing the form to appear in the first place. Plato’s basic objection to art and technology was that they betray and distort theoretically intelligible forms (‘Ideas’) when they transfer these into the material world. For him, artists and technicians were traitors to Ideas and tricksters because they cunningly seduced people into perceiving distorted ideas.

#Flusser1999 Modern bourgeois culture made a sharp division between the world of the arts and that of technology and machines; hence culture was split into two mutually exclusive branches: one scientific, quantifiable and ‘hard’, the other aesthetic, evaluative and ‘soft’. This unfortunate split started to become irreversible towards the end of the nineteenth century. In the gap, the word design formed a bridge between the two. It could do this since it is an expression of the internal connection between art and technology. Hence in contemporary life, design more or less indicates the site where art and technology (along with their respective evaluative and scientific ways of thinking) come together as equals, making a new form of culture possible.

Who and what are we deceiving when we become involved with culture (with art, with technology- in short, with Design)? #note 테크는 자연을 거스르고 아트는 자연을 manipulation 한다. 그 중간의 다리로서 디자인은 무엇을 해야하나. 디자인은 인간의 신체를 기준으로 카피하여 테크놀로지의 자연에 대한 거스름 중간의 자연과의 떨어짐을 보강한다. The word design has come to occupy the position it has in contemporary discourse through our awareness that being a human being is a design against nature. #note 막스에 따른 work가 가치의 기준인 점을 감안할때 기계로 자동화되어 만들어진 모든 오브젝트는 그 가치를 잃는다. 오직 하나의 가치가 남는다면 그것은 그것의 디자인이다. 물건들은 더이상 사람이 만들었다는 가치를 부여할 수 없다. 디자인은 아트와 사이언스가 함께 하나의 아이디어가 되었다는 것을 상징한다. 디자인이란 단어는 우리의 문화가 trickery라는 것을 깨닳게 하고 아트와 테크의 벽을 허물며 완벽한 디자인은 더 아름답게 살수 있도록 허용한다. 하지만 그 결과로 우리는 authenticity와 truth를 잃고 우리가 죽는 자연적 동물이라는 것을 잃게 한다. 디자인은 물건에 새로운 가치를 부여하며 그 뒤의 실제적 의미(artefact)를 가린다. 우리는 이제 wise up to the design behind them. #Barthes1977 The real origin of a text is not the author, but language. #note 나는 프레임이란 사전자체를 어떤 식으로 번역 하고 싶은가. 여러가지 프레임은 사전의 다른 의미를 내포한다.

The frame acquire determinate identities only through relations with one another, in the narrative. There are two relations, first inward relationship with the picture, second the outward relationship with another frame. The flow of the relationship makes the narratives. However, as the inner picture can be changed, or hang on the different wall or space by owners, fundamental component changing time to time by ownership/speaker. In Communication, however, one more component comes in

The frame is a suggestion of the common position for viewing: separate from yet facing it.

The frame is the positioning of the eye. It is related with when Quattrocento “system” transforms “scenographic space: space set out as the spectacle for the eye of the spectator” Uniformity of frame size and its aspect ratio as distinct from the variable sizes of frames in painting that #Heath argues was crucial for setting the conditions of Spectatorship. In a sense, the constraint of the rectangle is even greater in the cinema than in painting: in the latter proportions are relatively free; in the former, they are limited to a standard aspect ratio.[^4].

What is the difference from the Painting and Film and even with the Screen of the devices. Film limited to a standard screen ratio. The radio of the A4is 1:√2. Ratio of the Screen is 16:10, which is nearly Golden ratio

Structural Function/Homologous/bundled

The frame’s origin indistinct, but it became a component element of the the painting.when it became independent from its wall. wet lime plaster of a wall–had been a practice for fifteen thousand years. It was own form of architectonic structure.

Strings of code that were designed to perform one useful function can now be repurposed and reappear in entirely new contexts. A given chunk of functionality may have been developed by a particular party, for a particular reason, by the lights of a particular culture. Once bundled in a library, though, it is free to travel and recombine, with very few limits on its application. ThisGreenfield, A. (2017). Radical technologies. Brooklyn, NY: Verso.

Greenfield, Adam. Radical Technologies: The Design of Everyday Life (Kindle Locations 4409-4412). Verso Books. Kindle Edition.

1. Paper

Function and a subject

15th century

  • Until 15th century the word frames hardly exist, other than as the specific architectural setting to be decorated.
  • oil-based paint = available and storable in tubes

easel from the wall and studio enclosed site for painting

Berger:2008vj Ways of Seeing : safe let into the wall, a safe in which the visible has been deposited

Baxandall, M. (1988) Painting and Experience in Fifteenth Century Italy. Oxford Paperbacks.

A fifteenth-century painting is the deposit of a social relationship. 1) It was a pleasures of possession 2) contract between painters and their clients.

Commercial era

The value of the commercialised painting imbued the edges of its frame with a new meaning–the frame served as an opening the virtual vault, it became independent reality.

Easel painting established along with perspective system and camera obscure.[^3]

2. Camera

Function and a subject

Camera provide screen and frame and the image reflected, fixed, painted with light: Basic cinematic apparatus — consisting of the film, the film projector, the screen, and the spectator in a fixed relation — the film screen was cast as a conflationary substitute for the film frame.

3. Screen

Function and a subject

Physical touch, which was an argument within the earlier paragon in favour of three-dimensional works, is irrelevant for works displayed on a screen since screens do not give tactile information.

Wagner, M. (2010) ‘ISEA 2010 Ruhr’, in 8 September 2010 Berlin:. pp. 77–8.

@Vivian Sobchack use of the metaphor of the frame and the metaphor of the window and the metaphor of the mirror along phenomenological lines.

Spectator remains outside of the framed view.

Is it the Internet itself separated from the frame(screen) as the Frame separated from the picture by the picture separated from the wall? The picture is now not on the wall, not in the frame. What changed and happened? where picture now placed?

  • PC/Screen

Paper Screen. When the first webpage developed ‘www’ it was the purpose for the sharing the research paper. It was the archive purpose. If the screen is the touch from the frame by the seeing, the textual of the screen disappeared from its view. The remains is its matter of the elements and the limitation of the view. An immobile view is sometimes very repressively affect to hold on the viewer’s eye. e.i. glasses, 3D glasses, paper size… Each frame controls the seeing of touch.

How can I break down its repressiveness? how to make non bubble circle (or square) of its limitation?

Questions / Is document is ?

  • to read?
  • to view?
  • to store?

Then how it changed from document to screen? The picture was to view. It was not related with to read. Mainly it derived

Demonstrate the information as a part of the playing.

~2003 : 4:3

2003-2006 : 16:10 Golden ratio From laptops and then Standalone monitors. 16:10 display was considered to be better suited for productive uses such as word processing and computer-aided design.

2006~ : 16:9 DisplaySearch predicts that by 2010, 16:9 panels will make up 90% of new laptop displays and 67% of new monitors. These displays are more efficient to make, so they cost the display makers less money.these displays are more efficient to make, so they cost the display makers less money.[^5]

  • Tablet

2010~ : 16:10(Android), 16:9(Android) and 4:3(Apple)

16:10 aspect ratio is suitable for reading books, and many papers have an aspect ratio close to 16:10 (e.g. ISO 216 papers use the 1:1.414 aspect ratio).

The iPad uses a 4:3 aspect significantly closer to emulating the aspect ratio of A4 paper (210 × 297 millimeters or 8.27 × 11.69 inches).

4. Paper Mobile

Function and a subject


Fixed position

  • Positionally :

Now, it is no longer we are positioned in fixed relationship. We are still watching the fixed screen, however follow the Virtual Reality it is started break down to the ream of the frame. Even it is not only for the


frank stella

Kazimir Malevich



[^1]: Andrews, L. (1998). Story and space in Renaissance art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[^2]: Heath, S. (1981) ‘Narrative Space’, in Questions of Cinema. Palgrave. p. 257.

[^3]: Heath, S. (1981) ‘Narrative Space’, in Questions of Cinema. Palgrave. p. 257.

[^4]: Heath, S. (1981) Questions of Cinema. Palgrave.

[^5]: PCMAG. (2017). Where Displays Are Heading. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 Nov. 2017].