Aesthetics and Digital Image Processing: Representational Craft in Contemporary Astronomy

This paper examines whether ‘aesthetic’ considerations play a part in contemporary scientific work, and focuses on a scientific field undergoing rapid transformation through the introduction of digital imaging and image processing technologies. Interviews with astronomers at two image processing laboratories indicate that they orient explicitly to the ‘aesthetic’ judgments of their audiences when preparing images to promote and popularize their research. Although they acknowledge no such ‘aesthetic’ pretensions for their ‘scientific’ work, further analysis shows that a more ancient aesthetic, that of perfecting nature through a crafting of resemblances, is deeply a part of routine image processing work.

[1]  Michael Lynch,et al.  Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory , 1985 .

[2]  The Renaissance Development of the Scientific , 2022 .

[3]  Samuel Y. Edgerton.  The Renaissance rediscovery of linear perspective , 1975 .

[4]  H. Ridley.  Eye and Brain , 1973 .

[5]  David O. Edge,et al.  Astronomy Transformed: The Emergence of Radio Astronomy in Britain , 1978 .

[6]  H. Garfinkel,et al.  Temporal order in laboratory work , 1983 .

[7]  A Pifer,et al.  The aging society. , 1986, Daedalus.

[8]  Robert J. McEliece,et al.  The reliability of computer memories , 1985 .

[9]  William M. Ivins join,et al.  Prints and Visual Communication , 1953 .

[10]  P. Gorenstein,et al.  Young Supernova Remnants , 1985 .

[11]  Morley M. Blouke,et al.  Sky on a Chip: The Fabulous CCD , 1987 .

[12]  Linda Dalrymple Henderson,et al.  The Fourth Dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art , 1983 .

[13]  P. Vitz,et al.  Modern art and modern science: The parallel analysis of vision , 1985 .

[14]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice by H. M. Collins (review) , 1988, Technology and Culture.

[15]  Jack W. Sulentic.  The magic of image processing , 1984 .

[16]  Edward Rolf Tufte,et al.  The visual display of quantitative information , 1985 .

[17]  David Gooding,et al.  How do scientists reach agreement about novel observations , 1986 .

[18]  H. Garfinkel.  Studies in Ethnomethodology , 1968 .

[19]  David Topper,et al.  The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change , 1979 .

[20]  S. Shapin.  Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology , 1984 .

[21]  H. Garfinkel,et al.  I.1 The Work of a Discovering Science Construed with Materials from the Optically Discovered Pulsar , 1981 .

[22]  A. T. Young.  What color is the solar system , 1985 .

[23]  D. Bloor,et al.  Knowledge and Social Imagery , 1977 .

[24]  K. K. Cetina,et al.  The fixation of (visual) evidence , 1988 .

[25]  Michael Lynch,et al.  Art and artifact in laboratory science , 1985 .

[26]  Martin J. S. Rudwick,et al.  The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science 1760—1840 , 1976 .

[27]  Michael Lynch,et al.  Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility , 1985 .

[28]  K. Knorr-Cetina.  The Manufacture of Knowledge , 1981 .

[29]  Samuel Y. Edgerton.  Galileo, Florentine “Disegno,” and the “Strange Spottednesse” of the Moon , 1984 .

[30]  Roderick Martin,et al.  Scientific knowledge and sociological theory , 1975, Nature.

[31]  M. Mulkay.  Science and the sociology of knowledge , 1979 .