Question 4

I think that the combination of video, technical drawing and photographs creates a much more dynamic picture of the figurines than simply having 2-D images alone. However, while watching the videos it occurred to me how nice it would be to be able to manipulate the movement of the object myself, rather than watching someone else do it. I have seen a program used on others sites, such as the 360° view of cars on the car websites (Go to the Lexus web page at http://www.lexus.com/models/SC/ , click on 'Photos' and click on '360° Views' for example). This would be as informative as the videos on the site currently, with the addition of being interactive for the viewer. (CBL)

The typical photographic approach to documentation of figurines really only shows the one facet the photographer chose as the most important, so including 3-D (particularly interactive) models like the one proposed by CBL would allow the viewer to make his own choices about important features, encouraging reinterpretation of the figurines by not necessarily drawing the viewer's attention to any one part but rather presenting the object as an actual whole that can be handled and examined fully. (TL)

The digital drawings of everyday life do seem overtly subjective. I felt as though I needed further explanation as to how these images were created and thought to be true to life in Çatalhöyük. I think even short blurbs connected to the images section of "house interior" could be extremely helpful (JG)."

Like I stated in a previous answer, universalisms, in this case aesthetic parallels, can provide a starting point for analysis. It could be easy to take two photos of the front of two objects and note similarities. But if other angles of the same two objects showed complete differences, aesthetic parallels would probably not be a good way to analyze them. Other 3D visual modes of presentation would negate parallel assumptions. (KP)

I think it also depends on what context you're trying to set the objects in: is it a non-historical one, the original context, the present context? I think there is a certain value in having an image that we can explore as we would see fit, like the interactive 3-D model suggested above, but where would that value end if no other information is given? I imagine what I'm trying to get at is a personal dissatisfaction with the presentation of the object as a lone entity, without information, or explanation, or other objects to connect it with and build off of. It's compelling, but there needs to be some way to link the object with something beyond it, preferably non-visual. Visual links alone can lead to good interpretation, but it's a relatively uninformed interpretation for those not familiar with the materials. [LMR]