“A new media object is subject to algorithmic manipulation.” I found this quote in the passage concerning numerical representation to be quite interesting. One doesnt normally create or analyze things in terms of a numerical value or representation but in this passage they argue most new media is broken down to that idea. They say that most new media can be looked at as data but they revise their claim after introducing photography to the argument.
Photography as they say cannot be quantified numerically but I wonder how big a role does algorithmic manipulation play consciously in the creators mind. I think artists nowadays arent technical as this passage makes them out to be. New media has a way of creating greater ease and less technicality involvement as technology advances. For example automated video recording such as Vine allow for a point and shoot method of videography that allows for little numerical manipulation. The only numerical process is the timing in between shots. The idea that autoframing for cameras is a relevant process for creation, also eliminates the numerical manipulation by the hands of the creator to allow for greater ease.
Also with the idea standardization of new media by means of “models” presents a bleak future for art as a whole. The passage seems to suggest that at a certain point new media itself can be standardized. Just as how all Vine videos share the same content but are standardized by their interface, the new media is limited. Its understandable that all things involving computers use “ones and zeroes” but Id like to think new media isnt made by a solid foundation of numbers but a solid foundation of tinkering with outside a standardization. If one is confined to numbers in new media they are limiting their artistic abilities.
