Intermedia in Electronic Images

Yvonne Spielmann

Leonardo, Volume 34, Number 1, February 2001, pp. 55-61 (Article)

Published by The MIT Press

For additional information about this article

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/19636

Access provided at 10 Apr 2019 21:29 GMT with no institutional affiliation

 S A
Y N
N D

Intermedia in Electronic Images E

S
T
H
I
N
T
E E
S R
8 S
A B S T R A C T I E
A N
Yvonne Spielmann T he essay focuses on
S
E
S
the processes of intermedia
in visual media. The author’s
analysis of the merging of

T
still, moving and computed
images reveals that, in
intermedia, images tend to-
aking as a starting point the contemporary de- merges analog and digital media ward a spatial, rather than
bates of intermedia describing the phenomena of crossing the in a mixed form—the result is a temporal, organizing prin-
borders between traditional media (such as painting and pho- category of media arts known as ciple. This shift becomes
evident in particular in the
tography) and contemporary media (such as cinema, televi- intermedia, in which elements of
moving images in such elec-
sion, video, computer and other hypermedia), my essay opens differing media images are com- tronic films as Peter
the question of how we may consider the shift in the arts that bined and transformed to create a Greenaway’s Prospero’s
is caused by new technologies. What I am interested in is to new form of image. Greenaway Books. The limits of
show how the interrelationships between analog and digital produces a new type of image intermedia in the electronic
medium are unfolded in the
media result in new forms of media arts. For instance, when through the simulation of move-
concept of the coherent im-
different types of images are correlated and merged with each ment when he electronically ani- age by Zbigniew Rybczynski.
other on the borders of painting, photography, film, video mates single frames of phase pho- Another concept of com-
and computer animation, the interrelationships of the distinct tography. The result is not the pression and convergence is
demonstrated by Clea T.
elements cause a shift in the notion of the whole image. In moving image generally known in
Waite in her crossing two-
particular I discuss the processes of transformation effected film; rather the re-animation of and three-dimensionality in a
through convergence of elements of different media. The the static images results in a para- video installation.
characteristics of intermedia may be identified in certain dox: the electronic moving image
forms of the image, when elements of the static and the mov- here presents a static and a mov-
ing image are interrelated to create a third form of the image. ing image at the same time. The
For example, in the domain of cinema an intermedia state of paradoxical structure means that the interval that separates and con-
the image occurs when filmic processes of imaging based nects the different phases of the photography is made visible within
upon the interval are used in combination with digital tools a single frame unit—and that is the new quality—while at the same
(such as the graphic paint box) and elements of hypermedia time the continuity of filmic movement is also represented. Mobile
(multi-dimensional and omni-directional, namely multiple and immobile parts of the image are interrelated within one single
layers). The resultant mixed form of the image may reveal the frame that is digitally processed with the use of a graphic paint box.
continuities and similarities and also the discontinuities and
changes between analog and digital images, in particular Yvonne Spielmann (educator), Dept. of Media Studies, Cornell University, Society for
when both are combined in the electronic collage. the Humanities, 27 East Avenue, Ithaca, NY 14853-1101, U.S.A. E-mail:
<ys89@cornell.edu>.
Such a shift is made visible, for example, in Peter
An earlier version of the essay was published in the journal Iris, No. 25 (1998).
Greenaway’s electronic film Prospero’s Books (1991), which

Fig. 1. Zbigniew
Rybczynski, Long
Hall, still from the
HDTV videofilm
Kafka, 1992.
(© Zbigniew
Rybczynski)

© 2001 ISAST LEONARDO, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 55–61, 2001 55

S A
Y N
N D
E
S I
T N
H T
E E
S R
8 S
I E
A N
S
E
S
Fig. 2. Zbigniew Rybczynski, “Cathedral 1,” still from the HDTV videofilm Kafka, 1992. (© Zbigniew Rybczynski)
In Prospero’s Books Greenaway uses the
formal device of a frame-within-a-frame
structure to visually express and unfold
the contradictory dynamics and direc-
tions of a paradoxical image form. These
paradoxes in the moving image can only
be shown in the electronic simulation of
photographic (still) and cinematic (dy-
namic) images. For example, when the
image is divided into different frames,
different types of movement are shown
within these frames so that each single
section has its own specific movement
structure. On the surface of an electroni-
cally held simulation of freeze frame, the
inter-frame movement of any figuration
seems to run endlessly in the same loca-
tion on the film frame without really mov-
ing. The video still unfolds the simulation
of transfiguration, which can, but does
not have to, correspond to natural types
of motion. In contrast to the dissected
segments in phase photography, the com-
puter-animated images are speeded up to
a high degree, whereby speed represents
a variable dimension in the composition.
The digital re-animation of a freeze
frame from phase photography using the
paint box cannot be compared to serial
photography (e.g. Muybridge, Marey)
(Color Plate A No. 1).
The two levels of the mixed image are
divided by the use of immobile framing,
where the frame-within-a-frame device
functions as a digital collage: filmic figu-
56 Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
ration is represented in the outer frame,
and computed simulation of figuration
in the inner frame. While the outer
frame shows the conventional cinematic
moving image that expresses the linear
narration of the fiction film, the embed-
ded inner frame is reserved for pro-
cessed, transformed images that result
from the manipulation of previous forms
of the image (such as photographic or
filmic images). Within these immobile
inner frames, the computer animations
may produce the effect of continuously
moving animals, each within its own im-
age plane, or of a geometric drawing
turning around its own axis, thereby en-
gendering three dimensions. The key
images of animals or human figures in
motion seem to produce continuous
movement, but insofar as these animated
figures are keyed within a static form
represented by the immobile inner
frame, the structure of the inner move-
ment collides with the movement repre-
sented by the outer framed section—that
is to say, the entire frame unit. The effect
that occurs is that each animal set in mo-
tion through electronic simulation
seems to move on its own image plane
within the inner frame. At the same
time, the outer part of the image main-
tains the linear continuity of the film.
This paradox of a static and dynamic
image results from computer animation
insofar as the velocity of the images is var-
ied within one single frame unit.
Through the use of digital media, the cor-
relation between static and dynamic im-
ages, between photographic and filmic
images, can demonstrate how still images
can be transformed. This transformation
of different types of images, which causes
a shift in the organization of the whole
image, I will call “intermedia.”
It is important to emphasize that
intermedia is a formal category that de-
fines an interrelationship between or
among distinct media that merge with
each other, such as a photographic still
image reworked in a film or video. The
concept of intermedia, however, differs
from mixed media and multimedia (the
synchronous occurrence of different art
forms within the frame of one integral
medium such as theater, opera, film per-
formance), and it is historically linked to
the context of intertextuality and
intermedia that emerged in print and
visual forms of early twentieth-century
avant-garde art. In his research on the
correlation of word and image in Rus-
sian modernism, Aage A. Hansen-Löve
discusses the differences between the
concepts of intertextuality and
intermedia in relation to a system of dif-
ferent art forms, saying that the
intertextual indicates a shift within a
single art form [1]. Intertextuality ad-
dresses a text-text or film-film relation-
ship and should be distinguished from

intermedia, which relies on the interre-
lationship between two different art
forms that have developed separately
but through the correlation effects a
type of transformation that involves the
historically different development of
media as well.
First, intermedia differs then from mul-
timedia, which correlates different media
that are presented together synchro-
nously yet remain distinct. Second,
intermedia goes beyond mixed media,
which incorporates elements of one me-
dium in another (e.g. photography in
film, painting in photography.) What is
essential to intermedia and intertext-
uality as well is the category of transfor-
mation. But where intertextuality
expresses a text-text relationship, inter-
media means that the reference frame of
the entire system of art forms that medi-
ates the intermedial correlation is itself
included in the processes of transforma-
tion. In relation to visual media, then,
this definition of intermedia inherently
implies that the processes of transforma-
tion are reflected in the form of the im-
ages, because it is through the modes of
self-reflection that the structural shifts
characteristic of new media images are
mediated and made visible. The point is
that the transformation of elements of at
least two (historically) different media
creates a new form of image that reveals
Fig. 3. Zbigniew Rybczynski, “Cathedral 2,” still from the HDTV videofilm Kafka, 1992. (© Zbigniew Rybczynski)
these differences in a mixed form and
mostly reveals the self-reflexivity of the
medium in a paradoxical structure.
Film images that are reworked or ma-
nipulated with video and computer tech-
nologies indicate a visible shift in the cin-
ematic image only insofar as the
photographic and cinematic and their
related technologies of image design are
literally confronted with digitally pro-
cessed types of moving images. Peter
Greenaway has produced just such a
striking example of intermedia aesthet-
ics in Prospero’s Books, by reworking the
interval that relates to photography and
film on the digital level to create an im-
age cluster that relates the static and the
moving images to each other. The aes-
thetic function of the interval is impor-
tant for any comparison of different vi-
sual media, i.e. film, video and digital,
insofar as it represents a shift within tem-
poral categories. However, whereas the
function of the interval has been used in
the history of film to express a specific
temporal feature of the cinematic im-
age—that is, simultaneously to stress
temporal difference and to mediate con-
tinuity between two juxtaposed ele-
ments—in electronic film the interval
may be transformed into a different type
of image that is no longer film. When
the interval is reworked through elec-
tronic processing to create the simula-
Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
S A
Y N
N D
tion of a still image that effaces the gap, E
S I
the resultant type of image is a cluster. T N
H T
By the cluster, I mean a type of image E E
S R
that is widely used in electronic media 8 S
through the multiple layerings of differ- I E
A N
ent images or image elements, resulting S
E
in a spatial density. A cluster, more pre- S
cisely a visual cluster, implies a simulta-
neity of different layers within one
single image unit; as a term, it can be
applied to both film and video, but in
particular to electronic images that tend
toward the point of absolute density
within a frame. What is crucial is the fact
that a cluster does not take place as a se-
ries but as a spatialization of the moving
image. With the cluster and the interval,
I introduce two categories of inter-
medial relations. In this instance, the in-
terval accounts for the temporal notion
of the image, whereas the cluster relates
to the spatial organization of the image.
Thus, the structural elements that are
specific to different media, such as the
interval and the cluster, are correlated
in Greenaway’s Prospero’s Books.
I introduce the term “electronic film”
to describe artworks that basically rely on
moving images but also integrate features
of painting, photography (static image),
film (dynamic image) and the computed
simulation of the two (digital image).
The correlation and the merging of im-
ages that take place in the electronic
57
S A
Y N
N D
E simulation, where simulation means an
S I
T N aesthetic operation on the surface of the
H T
E E image, help to create an intermedia de-
S R
8 S
sign visible on the surface of the image.
I E This is different than in film, where the
A N
S structure of film may be distorted by the
E
S interval such that the linear organization
and the image velocity are manipulated.
The electronically simulated image ef-
fects the cinematographic moving image
such that particles of the image are accel-
erated or slowed down; the gradual suc-
cession of images will be stopped alto-
gether in the electronic still image.
Temporal features may collapse into spa-
tial, and vice versa. Finally, the spatial fea-
tures of the electronic film tend to be-
come an element in the merging of film
and computer in a new digital cinema
where the linear structure of film is dis-
rupted by multiple layers.
Through the dominant use of clusters
in electronic film to replace the func-
tion of the interval, Greenaway in
Prospero’s Books aesthetically explains the
shift from the temporal to the spatial or-
ganization of the image. Self-reflection
Fig. 4. Clea T. Waite, “Demo 4Split,” stills from the 3D video installation Kur, 1997. (© Clea T. Waite)
58 Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
is found in the visibility of the heteroge-
neous elements that are put together to
build a cluster. Greenaway is more inter-
ested in showing the incoherence of the
clusters than in producing coherence
through the use of matte effects or fur-
ther layers. Thus, self-reflection is a
means to make the twofold function of
visual clusters evident: on the one hand,
the cluster produces spatial density
through coherence and fusion; on the
other hand, a cluster may stress and me-
diate the discontinuity between layers.
Greenaway compares the constructing
principles of the interval and the cluster
at the level of intermedia, in that he si-
multaneously deals with forms of the
static and dynamic image in relationship
to the digital (computerized) image.
The result of this correlation is a struc-
tural comparison of different media that
is effected by the collision of different
types of movement and velocity within
the unit of one single image. This colli-
sion of different media images in the
cluster I will call a “hyperdynamic image
position.”
The hyperdynamic image position
represents a point of collision in which
the structural differences between the
two types of images, the static and dy-
namic as they have emerged in analog
media, are confronted with digitally pro-
cessed images at the level of electronic
representation. The paradoxical struc-
ture of the collision becomes visible in
the mixed form of the image that rein-
forces the processes of transformation.
The temporal features of film as repre-
sented through the concept of the inter-
val are thereby turned into image forms
of spatial density and simultaneity. The
hyperdynamic image position expresses
an intermediate step between different
visual media, where the moving and the
still image collide in the (spatial) density
of a cluster. Finally, it declares on the
electronic level, which here is the
intermedia level of comparison, that the
distinction between the media is an es-
sential issue in intermedia. Only that
which is distinct and separate can merge.
However there are limitations to this as
a conceptual definition of intermedia. In

Fig. 5. Clea T. Waite, “Time-Trail,” stills from the 3D video installation Kur, 1997. (© Clea T. Waite)
his HDTV (high-density TV) videofilm
Kafka (1992), Zbigniew Rybczynski devel-
ops the concept of a coherent image and
exposes the shift from analog to digital
when he performs processes of multiple
layerings that reveal on the representa-
tional level that the distinction between
media is not relevant. Rybczynksi uses the
device of motion simulation to create the
effect of a coherent image that encom-
passes up to 70 layers within one single
unit. With the use of a camera motion
control system that had been specially de-
veloped for this film, Rybczynski makes
the possibilities for temporal and spatial
camera movements infinite (Fig. 1). The
motion control system navigates the simu-
lation of the camera movements to create
complex composite shots (Figs 2, 3):
A character in Kafka may appear in sev-
eral places within the same shot, or
may walk away from a character in one
room only to encounter himself play-
ing a different character in another
room—all within the same takes. . . .
Like pieces of a puzzle, the actors and
the set’s floors, ceilings and walls are
photographed separately and then
matted together, creating composite
images made of up to 70 layers. . . . Be-
cause the actors are moving on rotat-
ing turntables, they are not bound to
the physical limitations of the studio
and can go anywhere. The same is true
of the camera [2].
The composite images are built into
moving clusters that hide their layers
and edit points in order to produce “a
seamless, smooth movement into the
next location” [3]. Such means of creat-
ing layers results in high spatial density
and deep focus of an image type that
rather reassembles processes of digital
images but per formed at the analog
level. On the edge of digital media,
Rybczynski further develops the means
of analog media in order to achieve
similar effects. The coherent image does
not reveal its construction principles.
The notion of this image is not self-re-
flection; on the contrary, it represents
the limits of the intermedia image be-
cause the differences between the differ-
ent elements are no longer made visible.
Thus, the coherent image of
Rybczynski and the hyperdynamic im-
age position of Greenaway exemplify
two different conceptualizations for re-
lating elements of different media to
each other. The coherent image makes
invisible the techniques of merging and
layering. In opposition, Greenaway’s in-
coherent image is categorized as
intermedial essentially based on the dif-
ferences that can be recognized. The
differences are expressed self-reflexively
in the form and shape of the artwork.
Transformation here has a twofold
meaning: one concerns the dialogue
between distinct elements that merge
into each other; the other one is the
collision of separate elements.
Collision results from elements of mov-
ing images and of static images that are
contrasted to each other in the form of
another medium, for example, in a com-
puted image. In collision, the different
media elements do not entirely lose their
attachment to their old media: they are
still recognizable as, for example, photog-
raphy and film brought together. At the
representational level, the collision is per-
formed within a structure of exchange
that makes clear the combined coherent
and incoherent aspects of both elements.
Exchange means another structural cat-
egory, namely the entire setting of inter-
relationships where the visible interval in
film can reveal its photographic quality,
or where the concept of a series in paint-
Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
S A
Y N
N D
E
S I
T N
H T
E E
S R
8 S
I E
A N
S
E
S
ing may evidently relate to film, and vice
versa. In exchange, the media-specific
types of images would be reworked in
other media at the level of form. The
transformation is the new visible form
that results from collision and exchange,
for example the hyperdynamic image po-
sition itself. Transformation thus be-
comes a structural category that expresses
the ways that those different elements are
connected and merged into each other,
thereby creating a new form.
The form of an intermedia artwork is
thus defined then not only by collision
but also by the exchange and transfor-
mation of elements that come from dif-
ferent media, such as painting, photog-
raphy, film, video and other electronic
media. Intermedia therefore is a formal
category of exchange. It signifies an aes-
thetic encompassment of both form and
content. In an intermedia work of art,
content becomes a formal category that
reveals the structure of combination and
collision. The related meaning of con-
tent is to express such modes of transfor-
mation that are effected by the collision
of painting and film, of film and elec-
tronic media, and so on. The contextual
meaning of intermedia is to reveal the
media forms themselves. The making
visible of elements that are considered
media specific can be per formed by
ways of comparing and transforming el-
ements such as the interval.
Intermedia is a concept of merging
based on historically separate develop-
ments. In the case of digital media, vari-
ous types of media are integrated—that
is, they merge with each other within
the same technical structure. As German
computer scientist Wolfgang Coy says,
“All written, optical, and electric media
with the use of microelectronics and
59
S A
Y N
N D
E computer techniques finally will merge
S I
T N into one universal digital medium” [4].
H T
E E This universal medium is often named
S R
8 S
“hypermedia,” thus signifying a multidi-
I E mensional structure. The computer is a
A N
S building block for creating new
E
S hypermedia. Hypermedia, the term in-
troduced by Ted Nelson [5] to describe
media that perform “multidimensional
ways” of branching, allow one to move
in a non-linear way through informa-
tion. The point is how to access different
media; the distinction between media is
not the issue in hypermedia. Multidi-
mensional connectivity and interactivity,
which are associated with hypermedia,
do not rely on the same transformation
category that is essentially the concern
in intermedia. The non-sequential struc-
ture in the first place indicates an op-
tion to connect each single digital me-
dium to another one. Networking in
hypermedia differs from that in
intermedia, in which the connection of
different media always involves a trans-
formation.
As said, intermedia differs not only
from hypermedia but also from multi-
media and mixed media. Both multime-
dia and mixed media are comparable to
hypermedia insofar as they describe the
expansion of a single medium in terms
of accumulation rather than of transfor-
mation. In his essay on intermedia, Dick
Higgins describes the different con-
cepts: “Intermedia differ from mixed
media; an opera is a mixed medium, in-
asmuch as we know what is the music,
what is the text, and what is the mise-en-
scène. In an intermedium, on the other
hand, there is a conceptual fusion” [6].
For example, multimedia and mixed
media art forms, in particular avant-
garde art, can be identified within hap-
Fig. 6. Clea T. Waite, “Embrace,” stills from the 3D video installation Kur, 1997. (© Clea T. Waite)
60 Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
penings, Fluxus performances, or re-
lated events that combine live art and
film. All these connect and combine dif-
ferent art forms on a level that does not
necessarily involve changing the struc-
ture of each single medium [7].
The consequence is that intermedia in
visual culture is best established by
modes of self-reflection. Self-reflection
in this instance is a medium-specific
strategy that is used to link formal as-
pects of different visual media, such as
painting, film and electronic media. In
particular, those forms of an image that
have occurred in one single medium un-
dergo a process of remodeling and re-
shaping when they are transferred into
the context of another visual medium.
Transferring results in transformation
when the structural elements of both
media are made evident and visible in a
form that reveals their differences. Be-
cause self-reflection reveals simulta-
neously those elements of incoherence
and those of coherence, it seems to be
an appropriate device to expose the spe-
cific interrelationship of two different
media. Thus, self-reflection is the most
striking device to make clear the twofold
structure of transformation, by revealing
the ways that different media can be con-
nected in one form. In visual culture, an
intermediate state of art occurs when the
forms of different media collide in an-
other form effected by transformation.
In the 3D video-installation Kur
(1997), Clea T. Waite disassembles the
twofold structure of intermedia. The in-
stallation consists of four screens, each
large enough to represent human
movement on a life-size scale. The
screens are spatially arranged to form a
square. The viewer wears 3D glasses and
enters into the middle of the square,
where it is impossible to see all the mov-
ing images on the four projection
screens simultaneously. This is crucial
to the concept of the installation, since
the four screens present four different
versions of the same story about a
Sumerian myth. Therefore, the viewer
of the installation necessarily has to se-
lect which of the different versions he/
she wants to see (Fig. 4).
Kur represents parallel time in a
three-dimensional simulation of space
that reveals the concept of time in space
and simulates how different times may
exist parallel to each other. The work si-
multaneously merges different moments
in time into one single image and pre-
sents the presence of parallel time on
four screens. The duality inherent in
this concept is expressed by specific im-
age devices: (1) the electronic flicker is
used to represent simultaneously two
different times; (2) digital feedback
makes visible the time trail and pro-
duces an aesthetic effect that creates a
spatial sculpture that makes visible dif-
ferent moments in time (Fig. 5); (3) par-
ticle effects result from the reworking of
density and show the distortion and the
re-creation of images (Fig. 6). By com-
pressing and decompressing space in
time, this process exemplifies a transfor-
mation between different forms of im-
ages. Kur shows time images that merge
into space and spatial images that merge
into time. What is important is that the
differences and distortions are made vis-
ible within the image itself (Fig. 4).
Waite’s video installation uses digital
video to show the emergence of forms of
media self-reflection, where the possibili-
ties of a two-dimensional image simula-
tion are expanded onto the level of
three-dimensionality. Waite’s simulation

image and the one developed by
Rybczynski both indicate an expansion
in electronic features of the image. They
are both concerned with the spatial and
temporal dimensions of the image. In
particular, they stress the concept of
space. The hyperdynamic image position
adopted by Greenaway acts as the turn-
ing point of time and space that is visible
within the paradoxical structure of the
image itself. These examples show how
media-specific devices change their form
and function in an intermedia form of
the image so that the temporal concept
of interval and the linear structure of
montage are opposed by features with
reversed functions. In these examples, it
is mainly the devices of clusters and mul-
tiple layerings that effect a conceptual
turn in linear montage when collage ele-
ments of spatial density are integrated.
The shift from the temporal to the spa-
tial thus occurs on the level of image de-
sign and does not indicate a change of
paradigm. It signifies an aesthetic ten-
dency that becomes evident at the struc-
tural level when the use of certain aes-
thetic devices, such as the cluster in
electronic images, causes a shift in prefer-
ence from the temporal to the spatial or-
ganization of the image. To avoid any
misunderstanding at the level of dis-
course, I want to make it clear that the
phenomena I have discussed as causing a
shift from temporalization to spatial-
ization in the organization of visual ele-
ments should be discussed and valued in
aesthetic terms. The argument that new
media images, in particular electronic
and computed images, indicate a shift
from the concern with temporal features
to a preference for spatial features should
not be mistaken as a statement claiming a
change of paradigm. On the contrary,
with regard to Niklas Luhmann’s defini-
tion that what signifies a change of para-
digm requires stating a change in media
[8], we are not dealing with an essential
difference in media, but with a categori-
cal difference in aesthetics. What is differ-
ent here is rather a shift in the notion of
the image, mainly effected by the use of
electronic devices.
CONCLUSION
In summary, intermedia is a conceptual
term. It should be applied in the first
place to a specific type of transformation
between different media. Secondly, the
term intermedia indicates the structure
of a transformation that is effected by a
collision of elements taken from differ-
ent media, and it is an identifiable aes-
thetic device in the media arts. The term
intermedia is useful then on three levels:
as a transformation category, as a struc-
tural term, and as an aesthetic device.
The discourse on intermedia encom-
passes an aesthetic practice in media art,
the structure of cultural and artistic pro-
cesses, and a technological metaphor,
whereas the distinction from multimedia
or hypertext is not so clear. Conceptually
the meanings of “inter,” “multi” and
“hyper” are not coherent, and the inco-
herence of their naming points to a
larger problem that lies within the phe-
nomenon itself. The descriptions of all
these phenomena shift, depending on
the discourse. Similar phenomena may
be described with different terms; differ-
ent aesthetic practices are subsumed un-
der the rubric of intermedia. Within me-
dia studies, for example, intermedia is a
conceptual term that stands for pro-
cesses that integrate structural elements
that are specific to different media. But
it is important to remember that the
meaning of the concept is twofold: on
the one hand, it signifies a technical de-
vice and, on the other hand, it refers to
the technological dimension of both cul-
tural and media processes. What is most
basic to the processes of intermedia in-
volves an activity of transformation and
not of accumulation, and what is at stake
is a new notion of the image that results
when analog and digital media are corre-
lated in a mixed form.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Peter Greenaway, Clea T.
Waite and Zbigniew Rybczynski for their kind per-
mission to publish illustrations of their works.
References and Notes
1. Aage A. Hansen-Löve, “Intermedialität und
Intertextualität. Problem der korrelation von Wort-
und Bildkunst—Am Beispiel der russischen Mod-
ern,” in Dialog der Texte, W. Schmid and W.-D.
Stempel, eds. (Vienna: Wiener Slawistischer
Almanach, 1983), Vol. 11.
2. Marsha Moore, “Motion Control. Hi-Def Kafka:
Metamorphosis via ‘Motion Simulation,’” American
Cinematographer 2 (1993) p. 65.
3. Moore [2].
Spielmann, Intermedia in Electronic Images
S A
Y N
N D
4. Wolfgang Coy, “Die Turing-Galaxis Computer als E
Medien,” in Weltbilder, Bildwelten, Interface 2, K.P. S I
Dencker, ed. (Hamburg: Hans-Bredow-Institut, T N
H T
1995) p. 53 (translated from the German). E E
S R
5. Theodor H. Nelson, “Hypermedia,” in Theodor 8 S
H. Nelson, Computer Lib/Dream Machines I E
A N
(Redmond, WA: Tempus Books of Microsoft Press, S
E
1987) p. 64: “Essentially, today’s system for present-
ing pictures, texts and whatnot can bring you differ- S
ent things automatically depending on what you
do. Selection of this type is generally called branch-
ing. (I have suggested the generic term hypermedia
for presentational media which per form in this
(and other) multidimensional ways.)”
6. Dick Higgins, Horizons, the Poetics and Theory of the
Intermedia (Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL:
Southern Illinois Univ. Press, 1984) p. 16.
7. For example, regarding film as a medium,
intermedia aspects can be traced in film’s early
phase, insofar as film brought together discrete el-
ements from literature, music, dance and theater.
But the medium of film is not per se intermedia.
8. Niklas Luhmann, “Paradigmawechsel in der
Systemtheorie,” in Epochenschwelle und Epochen-
bewußtsein (Poetik und Hermeneutik, Vol. 12), R.
Herzog and R. Koselleck, eds. (Munich: Wilhelm
Fink Verlag, 1987) pp. 305–322.
Glossary
frame—the terms “frame” and “framing” are com-
monly used in cinema studies to encompass the
point of view, the length of the take and the mobil-
ity or immobility of the camera. Therefore one can
distinguish between immobile framing and mobile
framing. For reference see David Bordwell and
Kristin Thompson, Film Art. An Introduction, 4th Ed.
(New York: McGraw Hill, 1993).
interval—standard technical term in cinema stud-
ies defining the distance (temporal and spatial) be-
tween single frames: the interval has the function
to connect and to separate spatially and temporally.
Furthermore, interval is a feature of montage that
interrelates different elements into a form that re-
veals their differences. The interval in the history
of film is defined by Dziga Vertov in his theories of
the interval montage. The most striking film to re-
veal the interval montage is Dziga Vertov’s The Man
with the Moving Camera (1929).
phase photography—to take photographs of single
moments of a movement, thereby dividing a con-
tinuous movement of a figure into single frames,
images, “shots.”
self-reflection—term used to describe a phenom-
enon such as the reflection of a figure onto a surface.
serial photography—a series of photographs taken
shortly one after the other and showing only mini-
mal differences between the previous and the next
image. Serial photography is a common feature in
cartography, where it is used to map a landscape by
taking pictures in series from the air.
Yvonne Spielmann is a teacher of Media
Studies at Cornell University. She is the au-
thor of numerous books and essays on experi-
mentation and the avant-garde; history and
theory of visual media; aesthetic theory in the
twentieth centur y; and media theories,
intermedia and visual culture. She is cur-
rently writing a book on video.
61