Semiotics and image analysis

At the core of much semiotic theory is the idea that the meaning generated by a text is not some fixed entity common to all of us. Texts are by their nature polysemic or capable of multiple interpretations. How a text is interpreted is largely determined by the cultural experiences that the reader brings to it.

Roland Barthes, literary theorist and Philosopher, developed the concept with the introduction of the 

signified and the signifier

The Signified = Denotation

The Signifier =  Connotation

Denotation -  this refers to the commonplace, obvious meaning of the sign.

A photograph of a street scene denotes that particular street; the word ‘street’ denotes an urban road lined with buildings. But I can photograph this same street in significantly different ways. I can use a colour film, pick a day of pale sunshine, use a soft focus and make the street appear a happy, warm, humane community for the children playing in it. Or I can use black and white film, hard focus, strong contrasts and make the same street appear cold, inhuman, inhospitable and a destructive environment for the children playing in it.

Those two photographs could have been taken at an identical moment with the cameras held with their lenses only centimetres apart. Their denotative meanings would be the same. The difference would be their connotation.

Connotation -  this refers to the associated meaning.

Barthes uses one of three ways in which signs connote meaning:

Connotation often has an iconic dimension. The way that a photograph of a child in soft focus connotes nostalgia is partly iconic. The soft focus is a motivated sign of imprecise nature of memory, it is also a motivated sign for sentiment: soft focus = soft hearted! But we need the conventional element to decode it in this way, to know that soft focus is a significant choice made by the photographer and not a limitation of his equipment.

Because connotation works on the subjective level, we are frequently not made consciously aware of it. The hard focus, black and white, in human view of the street can all too often be read as the denotative meaning: the streets are like this. It is often easy to read connotative values as denotative facts: one of the main aims of semiotic analysis is to provide us with the analytical method and frame of mind to guard against this sort of misreading.  

Let us return to our example of the street scene with which we illustrated connotation. If a dozen photographers were asked to photograph the scene of children playing in the street, most would produce the black and white, hard focus, inhumane type of photograph. This is because these connotations fit better with the commonest myths by which we conceptualise children playing in the street. Our dominant myth of childhood is that it is, or ideally should be, a period of naturalness and freedom. Towns are normally seen as unnatural, artificial creations that provide a restricted environment for children. There is a widespread belief in our culture that the countryside is a proper place for childhood. We can contrast these myths with those of other periods. For instance the Elizabethans’ saw a child as an incomplete adult.

But no myths are universal in a culture. There are dominant myths, but there are also counter-myths. There are subcultures within our society which have contradictory myths of the British bobby to the dominant above. So, too, there is a myth of the urban street as a self-supporting community, a sort extended family that provides a very good social environment for children. This would be the sort of myth to fit with connotations of our alternative photograph of the street.

Iconic, indexical and symbolic signs: photographic images look like the thing, place or person being represented. This makes them iconic signs. A portrait of a person is an obvious example of an iconic sign, because the picture resembles that person.

Some signs go beyond the mere depiction of a person or thing are indexically to indicate a further or additional meaning to the one immediately and obviously signified.        

1) The interaction that occurs when the sign meets the feelings or emotions of the user and the values of his/her culture.

This is when feelings move towards the subjective, or at least the intersubjective. 

This is when the interpretant (the film/subject) is influenced as much by the interpreter (the audience) as by the object or the sign.

2) Myth (the usual understanding of the word is disbelief) Barthes use is as myth meaning the original reference. i.e. the jolly bobby. 

3) Symbols – symbolic meanings; when an object becomes a symbol of something else, i.e. a Rolls Royce is a symbol of wealth. 

•

Our imaginary photographs are both the same street: the difference between them lies in the form, the appearance of the photograph, that is, in the signifier/connotation.

Barthes argues that in photography at least, the difference between connotation and denotation is clear.

Denotation is the mechanical reproduction on film of the object at which the camera is pointed.

Connotation is the human part of the process, it is the selection of what to include in the frame, of focus, aperture, camera angle, quality of film and so on. Denotation is what is photographed, connotation is how it is photographed.