A definição que Lev Manovich faz de media visualization, em What is visualization?, lembra os princípios de deep remixability , de Software takes command:
“Tag cloud exemplifies a broad method that can be called media visualization: creating new visual representations from the actual visual media objects, or their parts. Rather than representing text, images, video or other media though new visual signs such as points or rectangles, media visualizations build new representations out of the original media. Images remain images; text remains text.
In view of our discussion of data reduction principle, we can also call this method direct visualization, or visualization without reduction. In direct visualization, the data is reorganized into a new visual representation that preserves its original form. Usually, this does involve some data transformation such as changing data size. For instance, text cloud reduces the size of text to a small number of most frequently used words. However, this is a reduction that is quantitative rather than qualitative. We don’t substitute media objects by new objects (i.e. graphical primitives typically used in infovis), which only communicate selected properties of these objects (for instance, bars of different lengths representing word frequencies). My phrase “visualization without reduction” refers to this preservation of a much richer set of properties of data objects when we create visualizations directly from them”. (MANOVICH: 2010, p. 12).
“I believe that “media hybridity” constitutes a new fundamental stage in the history of media. It
manifests itself in different areas of culture and not nly moving images – although the later does offer a particularly striking example of this new cultural logic at work. Here media authoring software environment became a kind of Petri dish where the techniques and tools of computer animation, live cinematography, graphic design, 2D animation,typography, painting and drawing can interact, generating new hybrids. And as the examples above demonstrate, the result of this process of hybridity are new aesthetics and new “media species” which cannot be reduced to the sum of media that went into them.
Can we understand the new hybrid language of moving image as a type of remix? I believe so—if we make one crucial distinction. Typical remix combines content within the same media or content from different media. For instance, a music remix may combine music elements from any number of artists;anime music videos may combine parts of anime films and music taken from a music video.
Professionally produced motion graphics and other moving-image projects also routinely mix together content in the same media and/or from different media. For example, in the beginning of the “Go” music video, the video rapidly switches between liveaction footage of a room and a 3D model of the same room. Later, the live-action shots also incorporate a computer-generated plant and a still photographic image of mountain landscape. Shots of a female dancer are combined with elaborate animated typography. The human characters are transformed into abstract animated patterns. And so on.
Such remixes of content from different media are definitely common today in moving-image culture. In fact, I begun discussing the new visual language by pointing out that in the case of short forms such remixes now constitute a rule rather than exception. But this type of remix is only one aspect of “hybrid revolution” For me, its essence lies in something else. Let’s call it “deep remixability.” For what gets remixed today is not only content from different
media but also their fundamental techniques, working methods, and ways of representation and
expression. United within the common software environment, the languages of cinematography,
animation, computer animation, special effects, graphic design, and typography have come to form a new metalanguage. A work produced in this new metalanguage can use all the techniques, or any subset of these techniques, that were previously unique to these different media.” (MANOVICH: 2008, p. 110).