"

1he flrsL verslon of Lhls paper was wrlLen ln 1990. SubsequenL verslons were publlshed ln new Medla
1echnologles, 8oss Parley, edlLor (new SouLh Wales, AusLralla: Al18S, 1993), pp. 123-139, and ln ulsplay
Polography (llfLh lnLernaLlonal Symposlum - roc. SlL 2333), 1ung P. !eong, LdlLor (8elllngham, WA: SlL,
1993), pp. 123-137. 1hls paper dlscusses Lhe aesLheLlcs of holography from Lhe polnL of vlew of Lheorles of
percepLlon and represenLaLlon. 1he paper challenges Lhe noLlon LhaL holography ls excluslvely an arL of space,
reveallng lL as a Llme-based medlum.

!"#$#%&' )*+, &% $&-*. $"* /0$ #1 "#2#30/!"4
*567859 :7; <=>>?@

=A &%$0#BC'$&#%

Lvery medlum has a code, a seL of rules or convenLlons accordlng Lo whlch deLermlned
elemenLs are organlzed lnLo a slgnlfylng sysLem. 1he Lngllsh language ls a code as ls
perspecLlve ln palnLlng and phoLography. ln Lhe flrsL case, Lhe elemenLs are phonemes
organlzed lnLo words and senLences accordlng Lo a soclal convenLlon: Lhe synLax of Lngllsh.
ln Lhe second case, Lhe elemenLs are doLs and llnes organlzed lnLo plcLures accordlng Lo a
geomeLrlc meLhod.
An arLlsL or movemenL can break Lhe convenLlons of Lhe medlum, as has done CZzanne wlLh
palnLlng, Moholy-nagy wlLh phoLography and cummlngs wlLh Lhe Lngllsh ldlom ln poeLry,
and creaLe new elemenLs and rules for comblnlng Lhem. lf Lhls ls done, Lhe level of
predlcLablllLy (or convenLlonallLy) ls lowered and unpredlcLablllLy ls lncreased -- becomlng
more dlfflculL for Lhe lmmedlaLe audlence Lo undersLand lL. 8uL once Lhls new rules are
learned and Lhe ldeas behlnd Lhem wldely undersLood, Lhe level of unpredlcLablllLy ls
lowered and Lhey become new convenLlons LhaL can be accepLed by Lhe audlence.
Polographlc arLlsLs explorlng Lhe medlum -- as opposed Lo adverLlsers uslng holography,
who favor a hlgh level of predlcLablllLy -- are breaklng several vlsual and culLural
convenLlons. As a maLLer of facL, holography ls so new LhaL many quesLlons are lefL open
abouL Lhe naLure of Lhe medlum. 1herefore, any aLLempL Lo clarlfy Lhe lssues ralsed by
holography on a culLural level has a prospecLlve (and noL concluslve) Lone, concenLraLlng
more Lhoroughly on general polnLs and on Lhe promlse of lLs poLenLlallLles Lhan on Lhe
records of lLs hlsLorlcal achlevemenLs so far.

DA $"* *$4-#2#34 #1 E"#2#30/-E

1he word "phoLograph" was flrsL suggesLed by lrench-born ploneer Percules llorence ln
1833 (1), as a consequence of hls aLLempL Lo use llghL Lo prlnL labels and dlplomas on paper
wlLh a sllver coaLlng. 8uL whlle phoLography as we know lL Loday was lnvenLed by nlZpce as
a culmlnaLlon of cenLurles of research ln LhaL dlrecLlon, holography, as many oLher
lnvenLlons ln Lhe LwenLleLh cenLury, was Lhe by-producL of a search for someLhlng else.
namely, a meLhod for lmprovlng Lhe quallLy of lmages recorded on a elecLronlc mlcroscope.
As opposed Lo phoLography, holography dld noL come as a consequence of cenLurles of
perfecLlblllLy. uennls Cabor, lLs lnvenLor, needed ln 1947 whaL was Lo be laLer called a laser
Lo make Lhree-dlmenslonal holograms , buL he lnvenLed holography almosL flfLeen years
ahead of Lhe appearance of Lhe flrsL laser (2). Lven ln Lhe early slxLles, when Lhe flrsL Lhree-
dlmenslonal holograms were made, Lhe Lechnlque was labeled "a soluLlon ln search of a
problem" by Lhe press. More Lhan LhlrLy years have passed slnce Lhe lnvenLlon of
#
holography, buL Lhe characLer LralLs of Lhe medlum as such and lLs culLural meanlng remaln
lncognlLo.
As observed before, Cabor colned Lhe word " hologram" -- whlch ls wldely used Lo Lhe
deLrlmenL of Lhe word " holograph" . Whlle Lhe former corresponds Lo Lhe nomenclaLure
esLabllshed by lLs lnvenLor, Lhe laLLer ls used only by Lhose who Lry Lo lmply LhaL Lhe
hologram ls an exLenslon of Lhe phoLograph or by Lhose who are noL concerned wlLh Lhelr
dlfferences. 1he polnL Lo be made here ls LhaL Lhe word " hologram" ls more preclse ln
namlng lLs referenLlal ob[ecL.
" Polos" sLands ln Creek for " LoLal, compleLe" , " gramma" means leLLer and wrlLlng. lL has
Lhe same rooLs of " grapheln" (" Lo wrlLe" ). ln anclenL Creece, however, Lhe leLLer was also
used as a number, l.e., as a sysLem for Lhe measuremenL of dlsLlngulshable unlLles (Lherefore
Lhe currenL use of Lhe sufflx ln " kllogram" , whlch does noL mean wrlLlng wlLh welghL buL
Lhe unlLy formed by one Lhousand grams.) So lf " gram" deslgnaLes Lhe unlLy and " holos" ,
Lhe LoLal, Lhe word " hologram" means Lhe unlLy of Lhe whole as well as Lhe wholeness of
Lhe unlLy -- whlch Lhe word " holograph" could never express. AcLually , " holograph" , ln any
dlcLlonary, deslgnaLes " a documenL wholly ln Lhe handwrlLlng of lLs auLhor". So, slnce ln a
hologram each parL ls slmllar Lo Lhe whole, a spaLlal characLerlsLlc LhaL wlll be addressed
laLer, only Lhe word "hologram" should be used and Lhe mlsleadlng " holograph" avolded.

FA / "#2#30/- &, %#$ / !&'$C0*

8y avoldlng Lhe word "holograph", one ls also avoldlng Lhe equlvocaLed ldea LhaL holography
ls a klnd of phoLography. AfLer 130 years of developmenLs, phoLography ls a medlum Lhe
convenLlons of whlch are now well esLabllshed and accepLed by Lhe publlc. 1herefore, a
comparlson beLween boLh medla mlghL Lake advanLage of Lhe general accepLance of
phoLography noL Lo lmply klnshlp buL Lo serve Lhe purpose of examlnlng a few quesLlons by
conLrasL.
AlLhough nlepce and llorence were also lnLeresLed ln phoLography as a prlnLlng Lechnlque,
Lhe use of Lhe camera by uaguerre and 1alboL gave shape Lo Lhe medlum0s capablllLy of
Laklng accuraLe plcLures of real Lhlngs. lrom Lhen on, phoLography evolved ln Lwo baslc
dlrecLlons: one, Lhe hlsLorlcal and [ournallsLlc approach, has foundaLlons ln Lhe recognlLlon
of Lhe phoLograph as a rellable meLhod of documenLaLlon, Lhe oLher, Lhe creaLlve approach,
ls based upon Lhe lnvenLlon of non-documenLal lmages by means of cropplng, solarlzaLlon,
monLage, negaLlve manlpulaLlon eLc. ln boLh cases, Lhough, one wouldn0L be wrong ln
sLaLlng Lhe Lrulsm LhaL wheLher Laken wlLh a camera or noL, Lhe phoLograph ls ulLlmaLely a
Lwo-dlmenslonal lmage and phoLography ls a plcLure-maklng Lechnlque. lL ls Lhe arL of flxlng
an lmage on a plane ln such a way (wlLh varylng degrees of shade) LhaL Lhe lmage becomes
Lhe plane.
Pere a dlsLlncLlon should be made. As opposed Lo Lhe phoLograph, Lhe hologram ls noL a
plcLure and holography ls noL prlmarlly a plcLure-maklng Lechnlque. lf Lhls ls Lrue, all
aLLempLs Lo analyze holography from a sLralghL plcLorlal vlewpolnL, or Laklng slmpllsLlc
novelLy holograms as lf Lhey represenLed Lhe whole world of holography, wlll prove Lo be
mlsleadlng. An examlnaLlon of an ordlnary facL, such as shopplng ln a supermarkeL, mlghL
make us aware of someLhlng LhaL oLherwlse would be unnoLlceable. Lvery Llme one goes
shopplng ln a supermarkeL, one reallzes LhaL Lhe checklng ouL was speeded up by Lhe use of
a laser scannlng process LhaL "reads" Lhe unlversal roducL Code (uC) and provldes prlce,
an lLemlzed recelpL and lnvenLory daLa Lo Lhe sLore compuLer. 1he devlce locaLed lnslde Lhe
$
scanner LhaL bends Lhe laser llghL ln Lhe dlrecLlon of Lhe producL and back Lo Lhe
mlcroprocessor ls a hologram (or a seL of holograms) ln a glass wheel. 1hls hologram (or seL
of holograms) doesn0L bear an lmage aL all. WhaL lL acLually does ls [usL Lo perform Lhe
funcLlon of a lens, l.e., lL only dlffracLs llghL ln a parLlcular way. Polograms LhaL do noL
dlsplay lmages buL lnsLead do perform as opLlcal elemenLs are galnlng ever more lndusLrlal
and sclenLlflc appllcaLlons. So lf we can noL only Lhlnk of buL acLually use holograms as
opLlcal elemenLs and noL llke plcLures, lf Lhey can perform raLher Lhan bear an lmage, Lhey
are noL exLenslons of phoLographs buL a new way of recordlng, sLorlng and reLrlevlng opLlcal
lnformaLlon, l.e., lnformaLlon carrled by llghL waves.
1he way a hologram sLores opLlcally an lmage can be compared Lo a cerLaln exLenL Lo Lhe
way a compuLer dlsk sLores dlglLally an lmage. 1he dlglLal lmage has Lo be Lransformed lnLo
1s and 0s Lo be recorded on Lhe dlsk and Lo be read by Lhe sofLware on Lhe hard drlve. 1he
holographlc lmage has Lo be codlfled lnLo an lnLerference paLLern Lo be recorded on Lhe fllm
or plaLe. 1hls paLLern dlffracLs an lncldenL beam of laser or whlLe llghL so LhaL Lhe
mlcroscoplc paLLern can be LranslaLed lnLo a vlsual lmage.
1o say LhaL Lhe hologram ls dlsLlncL from Lhe holographlc lmage means LhaL Lhe flrsL ls [usL
Lhe sLorlng medlum, whlle Lhe second ls whaL ls sLored. All Lhe flucLuaLlons, changes,
lnconsLancles, leaps, Lurbulences and rhyLhms percelved ln complex holographlc arL pleces
are Lhe resulL of careful work on Lhe level of Lhe muLable sLrucLures by whlch Lhe vlsual
lnformaLlon ls sLored, and noL on Lhe level of Lhe lmages Lhemselves. 1o say LhaL Lhe
hologram ls noL Lhe holographlc lmage means LhaL one cannoL "reLouch" Lhe lmage because
one can only "Louch" Lhe sLorage medlum. 1he sensorlal response Lo holographlc lmages
(and very clearly noL Lo holograms) ls amblguous ln Lhe sense LhaL Lhe person who Lrles Lo
grab Lhe lmage knows LhaL he/she ls noL looklng aL an apple, buL neverLheless Lrles Lo cluLch
Lhe lumlnous lmage only Lo have Lhe unusual experlence of conLrasL beLween vlslon and
Louch. 1he beholder ls noL looklng for decepLlon, he/she ls noL wanLlng Lo be fooled, buL
wanLs Lo have an acuLe conLrasLlng experlence based on Lhe ldenLlflcaLlon of Lhe appearance
of a famlllar ob[ecL and lLs non-correspondenL LacLlle conLours. 1he dlsLlncLlon beLween a
hologram and a holographlc lmage also means LhaL damaglng Lhe hologram does noL
damage Lhe lmage, because Lhe laLer ls recorded all over Lhe emulslon. ln a phoLograph, as
seen from Lhe vlewflnder, for every geomeLrlcal polnL on Lhe surface of Lhe ob[ecL Lhere ls
one and only one correspondenL geomeLrlcal polnL on Lhe surface of Lhe lmage. ln a
hologram, as seen from Lhe fllm holder, for every geomeLrlcal polnL on Lhe surface of Lhe
fllm Lhere ls a compleLe vlew of all Lhe avallable lnformaLlon of Lhe ob[ecL. lf one polnL ls
mlsslng, Lhe oLher polnLs wlll reconsLrucL Lhe compleLe lmage of Lhe ob[ecL wlLhouL any
problem.
1hls dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe hologram and Lhe holographlc lmage, ralsed by Lhe example of
Lhe supermarkeL scanner, mlghL ulLlmaLely mean LhaL, when looklng aL holograms LhaL do
dlsplay lmages, chlefly aL arL pleces wlLh complex space-Llme relaLlons, one should
concenLraLe ln appreclaLlng Lhe rhyLhm orchesLraLed by hls or her own dynamlc percepLlon
of Lhe lnformaLlonal sLrucLure of Lhe plece raLher Lhan Lry Lo reduce Lo a monoscoplc vlslon a
sensorlal experlence LhaL demands exLenslve blnocular problng. ln oLher words, Lhe ldea of a
hologram as "perfecLed phoLography", capable of reproduclng "beLLer" Lhe appearance of an
ob[ecL (Lhe adverLlslng approach) glves place Lo Lhe undersLandlng of Lhe hologram as a
medlum for encodlng complex spaLloLemporal lnformaLlon (Lhe arLlsLlc approach). 1he
complexlLy of Lhe way lnformaLlon ls sLored ln Lhe hologram mlghL even ln cerLaln cases
challenge Lhe blnocular (or "sLereoscoplc") percepLlon of lmages and space by sendlng
%
absoluLely dlfferenL lmages Lo each eye, Lherefore deLerrlng percepLlon of Lhree-
dlmenslonal "ob[ecLs" Lo favor a dynamlc amalgam of lmages.
1he holographlc lmage, as opLlcal lnformaLlon, ls ulLlmaLely a spaLloLemporal one, and noL a
volumeLrlc or ln-rellef one, as dlsLlncL from Lhe sLereoscoplc or anaglyphlc drawlng or
phoLograph. Anaglyphs and sLereographs produce an lmmuLable lmage of a locallzed rellef
wlLhouL surroundlng space, from whlch Lhe Lemporal dlmenslon ls exLracLed, whlle
holograms produce lmages surrounded by acLual space Lhe parallax of whlch has Lo be
percelved ln duraLlon.

GA $"* HC*,$&#% #1 0*!0*,*%$/$&#% &% "#2#30/!"4

8ecause holograms are a way for recordlng, sLorlng and reLrlevlng lnformaLlon, and because
Lhey can dlsplay an lmage or replace cerLaln ob[ecLs ln Lhelr funcLlon (or even perform
cerLaln funcLlons LhaL ob[ecLs cannoL) wlLhouL dlsplaylng any lmage, Lhey pose a complex
quesLlon regardlng Lhe way Lhey represenL (or noL).
lL ls very clear from Lhe ouLseL LhaL holograms don'L represenL anyLhlng, ln Lhe same way
LhaL a compuLer dlsk doesn'L represenL anyLhlng elLher. Polograms presenL Lhlngs (lmages)
or are Lhlngs (dlffracLlon graLlngs ln a supermarkeL scanner). 1hls lsn'L so complex a
quesLlon. 8uL holographlc lmages, yes, Lhey do represenL ln a way LhaL ls pecullar: lL ls a
resulL of Lhe characLerlsLlc LralLs of Lhe medlum as such buL ls also a consequence of our
esLheLlc code, l.e., Lhe convenLlons accordlng Lo whlch we assoclaLe an lmage Lo someLhlng
exLerlor Lo lLself, as ln Lhe case of a holographlc porLralL. 1he problem comes from Lhe facL
LhaL Lhe synLax and Lhe elemenLs of Lhe vocabulary of holography are noL yeL wldely known,
maklng lL very dlfflculL , even for Lhe scholar, Lo "read" holographlc lmages. 1he ones LhaL
are very easy Lo "read" are Lhe ones LhaL Lry Lo resemble phoLographs or ob[ecLs, LhaL Lry Lo
Lake advanLage of Lhe vlewer's knowledge of anoLher slgnlfylng sysLem Lo convey a
sLralghLforward message, usually for adverLlslng or decoraLlve purposes, for commerclal
raLher Lhan for lnqulry alms. 1hose lmages are of no lnLeresL Lo Lhls essay, because Lhey
mlslead Lhe vlewer by maklng hlm/her Lhlnk LhaL holograms are "opLlcal llluslons" raLher
Lhan a means for recordlng, sLorlng and reLrlevlng opLlcal lnformaLlon. 1he emphasls shall be
placed ln Lhe unlqueness of Lhe holographlc lmage, and noL ln lLs reducLlon Lo oLher sysLems
LhaL Lralnlng and hablL have already masLered.
ln "Cn Longlng", Susan SLewarL demonsLraLes unwllllngly Lhls reducLlonlsL approach Lo
holography, or Lo whaL she names lmpreclsely "holographlc arL", l.e., mass produced sLock-
lmages sold as souvenlrs or decoraLlve gadgeLs. SLewarL wrlLes:

1he complex Lechnology of "holographlc arL" erases lLs auLhor and lLs referenL, whaL maLLers ls LhaL lL works,
noL LhaL lL polnLs Lo someLhlng ouLslde lLself. lLs conLenLs seem sLrangely unmoLlvaLed, sLrangely ouL of key
wlLh Lhe Lechnlcal sophlsLlcaLlon of lLs mechanlsms: a woman's face, a parroL ln a cage, scenes LhaL resemble
Lhose of romanLlc greeLlng cards. ConLenL ls empLled of lnLerpreLablllLy. Whlle modernlsL arL dellghLed ln
"maklng sLrange" Lhe everyday, Lhls Lechnlcal arL dellghLs ln Lurnlng Lhe sLrange lnLo Lhe obvlous, ln mapplng
mysLery onLo cllche. Polographlc arL ls an arL llke LhaL of commerclal Lelevlslon, a mysLlflcaLlon of Lechnology
accompllshed ln a gesLure whlch proclalms Lhe lnnocuousness of all conLenL. ln facL, wlLhouL Lhls unlvocal and
mlmeLlc conLenL, we would noL be able Lo dlsLlngulsh arLlsLlc from sclenLlflc uses of Lhe holograph.(3)

ConLenL, ln Lhe case of Lhe lmages LhaL SLewarL herself recognlzes as resembllng greeLlng
cards, are noL empLled of lnLerpreLablllLy buL full of predlcLablllLy. 1hose lmages are
deslgned noL Lo cause sLrangeness, so LhaL Lhey can be prompLly assoclaLed Lo well known
lmages, so LhaL Lhey can convey LransparenLly Lhelr conLenL as plcLures LhaL resemble oLher
&
plcLures. As says nelson Coodman, echolng 8erkeley, "lcLures ln perspecLlve, llke any
oLhers, have Lo be read, and Lhe ablllLy Lo read has Lo be acqulred.(4)" A slmple lmage of an
anonymous woman's face, even lf lL ls ln Lhree-dlmenslons, does noL demand Lhe dlscovery
of rules of lnLerpreLaLlon. lL relles on Lhe experlence of looklng aL acLual faces as well as ln
Lhe experlence of looklng aL plcLures of faces. SLewarL also menLlons, uslng Lhe word
"holograph", LhaL we already descrlbed as lnapproprlaLe, Lhe "mlmeLlc conLenL" of Lhese
parLlcular klnd of holograms as lf all holograms, lncludlng Lrue holographlc arL pleces, had
"mlmeLlc conLenL." MlmeLlc means lmlLaLlve, and Lo lmlLaLe ls Lo mlrror Lhe appearance, ls
Lo resemble. Lven lf a hologram of an apple can be sald Lo mlrror an apple, LhaL doesn'L
mean LhaL lL represenLs an apple. We [usL saw LhaL Lhe woman's face ln SLewarL's
"holograph" does noL represenL a parLlcular woman or women ln general, aL Lhe mosL lL
represenLs anoLher plcLure of a woman's face. So whaL happens here ls noL LhaL Lhe referenL
ls belng erased, slmply, Lhe referenL of Lhe lmage ln Lhls case ls noL an ob[ecL buL anoLher
lmage LhaL poses no lnLerpreLaLlon problems. As Coodman explalns, some plcLures we read
by auLomaLlc hablL, "pracLlce has rendered Lhe symbols so LransparenL LhaL we are noL
aware of any efforL, of any alLernaLlves, or of maklng any lnLerpreLaLlon aL all."(3)

noL all holograms, Lhough, Lry Lo mlnlmlze Lhelr unlque characLerlsLlcs so LhaL Lhey can be
grasped as qulckly as Lhey would lf Lhey were phoLographs. 8audrlllard sLaLes LhaL "we are
lefL Lo know whaL klnd of ob[ecLs and forms wlll be hologenlc, because Lhe hologram's
desLlny ls noL one of reproduclng Lhree-dlmenslonal movles as movle's desLlny was noL one
of reproduclng LheaLer and phoLograph's desLlny was noL one of approprlaLlng Lhe concepLs
of palnLlng.(6)" 8uL Lo Lhlnk ln Lerms of "ob[ecLs and forms" ls sLlll Lo Lhlnk ln Lerms of
volumes and rellefs, and noL ln Lerms of empLy space or ln Lerms of a four-dlmenslonal
space-Llme conLlnuum. 8audrlllard asks: "why wlll Lhe slmulacrum ln Lhree-dlmenslons be
closer Lo Lhe real Lhan Lhe one ln Lwo-dlmenslons?" And he hlmself provldes Lhe answer:

lL lnLends Lo be, buL lLs paradoxlcal effecL ls, lnversely, LhaL of maklng us senslLlve Lo Lhe fourLh dlmenslon as
concealed LruLh, secreL dlmenslon of all Lhlngs, LhaL all of a sudden assumes Lhe power of an evldence. (...) ln
shorL, Lhere ls no real: Lhe Lhlrd-dlmenslon ls Lhe lmaglnary of a Lwo-dlmenslonal world, Lhe fourLh, of a Lhree-
dlmenslonal unlverse... Scallng ln Lhe producLlon of a real whlch becomes even more real by addlLlon of
successlve dlmenslons (...): lL only ls LruLhful, lL only ls Lruly seduclng LhaL whlch plays wlLh one mlsslng
dlmenslon.(7)


1he "real", llke Lhe ob[ecL of observaLlon ln quanLum mechanlcs, depends upon observaLlon,
lL changes when observed, lL ls only real when lL can be observed. Lvery observaLlon
corresponds Lo Lhe culLural sLandard of a cerLaln socleLy aL a glven Llme, and Lhe lmages
produced wlLhln Lhls framework change LogeLher wlLh Lhe model employed Lo observe,
descrlbe or represenL any parLlcular noLlon of Lhe "real". 8audrlllard uses Lhe holographlc
lmage as a symbol for Lhls culLural relaLlvlsm:

1he meanlng, Lhe LruLh, Lhe real, Lhey can only appear locally, ln a resLrlcLed horlzon, because Lhey are parLlal
ob[ecLs, parLlal effecLs of equlvalence and mlrrorlng. Lvery redupllcaLlon, every generallzaLlon, every passage
Lo Lhe llmlL, every holographlc exLenslon (whlm of explalnlng exhausLlvely Lhe unlverse) makes Lhem emerge ln
Lhelr own derlslon.(8)



'
Some holographlc lmages sald Lo be "reallsLlc" wlll only be so lf we sLaLe LhaL our noLlon of
Lhe real ls changlng, because lL wlll be only Lhen LhaL we wlll be able Lo esLabllsh a symbollc
relaLlonshlp beLween Lhose lmages (LhaL challenge our senses and our very noLlon of whaL
lmages are and how Lhey work) and Lhe world. ln Lhe 8enalssance, man placed hlmself ln a
vanLage polnL Lo organlze Lhe sensorlal (lrraLlonal) daLa of Lhe surroundlng world wlLh
maLhemaLlcal (loglcal) rules, lnLerrupLlng symbollcally lLs chaoLlc flux wlLh a schemaLlc
plcLure LhaL expressed Lhe supremacy of hls vlewpolnL, Lhe man of Lhe LwenLleLh-flrsL
cenLury ls experlenclng Lhe saLelllLlzaLlon of Lhe gaze, he ls looklng aL Lhe world as a whole
from lLs orblL, noL from lnslde llke Lhe 8enalssance man dld wlLh perspecLlve, buL from
ouLslde, llke we do wlLh holography, Lo have a LoLallng vlew and Lo be able Lo scruLlnlze and
conLrol lL more flrmly, as we Lry Lo do wlLh Lhe weaLher (forecasL saLelllLe) or wlLh our
nelghbor counLry (mlllLary saLelllLe). We now measure Lhe smallesL Lemporal unlL Lo be ever
measured: Lhe "femLosecond", or a bllllonLh of a mllllonLh of a second. We now play wlLh
aLoms aL our wlll ln scannlng Lunnellng mlcroscopes llnked Lo lmmerslve vlrLual reallLy
sysLems. Lven gravlLy we seem Lo sLarL Lo neuLrallze, wlLh superconducLlve ceramlcs.
WheLher ln a mlcroscoplc or a macroscoplc scale, we are redeflnlng our models. 1he
lumlnous holographlc lmage, for example, ls a clear sLaLemenL abouL maLLer and energy as a
conLlnuum raLher Lhan dlsLlncL enLlLles. Why would an lmage made of a less dense sLaLe of
Lhls conLlnuum look more or less reallsLlc Lhan an lmage made wlLh a denser sLaLe? 1he
noLlon of whaL ls or whaL looks reallsLlc wlll follow Lhe ongolng paradlgmaLlc change.
"8eallsm ls a maLLer noL of any consLanL or absoluLe relaLlonshlp beLween a plcLure and lLs
ob[ecL buL of a relaLlonshlp beLween Lhe sysLem of represenLaLlon employed ln Lhe plcLure
and Lhe sLandard sysLem", as wroLe Coodman.(9)

ls a holographlc lmage more "reallsLlc" Lhan a phoLograph lf lL ls a sclenLlflcally more
accuraLe "opLlcal llluslon"? ls a hologram an "llluslon" ln any lnsLance? ln order Lo answer
Lhese quesLlons one has Lo clearly deflne whaL one means by llluslon. Combrlch explalns
LhaL ln arL-hlsLorlcal wrlLlng Lhe Lerm llluslonlsm does noL connoLe LhaL llluslon or even
decepLlon ls Lhe maln alm of arL.

[1he Lerm llluslonlsm] was lnLroduced by lranz Wlckhoff ln 1893 ln hls famous publlcaLlons
of Lhe vlenna Cenesls, an early ChrlsLlan manuscrlpL, Lo characLerlze Lhe defL sLyle of
brushwork whlch had survlved from PellenlsLlc Llmes. 1he ldea LhaL anyone should have
confused Lhe lllusLraLlons of Lhe manuscrlpL wlLh reallLy obvlously dld noL enLer hls mlnd.
WhaL he wanLed Lo convey, qulLe rlghLly, was Lhe dlfference beLween Lhls sLyle and oLher,
less llluslonlsLlc, meLhods.(10)

1he Lerm llluslonlsm Lherefore never meanL LhaL Lhe vlewer would be decelved by an lmage
and Lhlnk LhaL he/she ls looklng aL Lhe ob[ecL raLher Lhan aL a represenLaLlon. 8uL an
argumenL mlghL be ralsed LhaL Lhe alm of llluslon ls Lo creaLe ln Lhe vlewer Lhe same
response LhaL Lhe vlewer would have Lo Lhe ob[ecL ln slmllar condlLlons of observaLlon.
uescarLes knew LhaL "no lmages have Lo resemble Lhe ob[ecLs Lhey represenL ln all respecLs
(oLherwlse Lhere would be no dlsLlncLlon beLween Lhe ob[ecL and lLs lmage)" (11) and,
furLhermore, as clarlfles Coodman, whaL decelves depends upon whaL ls observed, and whaL
ls observed changes wlLh lnLeresLs and hablLs. WrlLes Coodman:


(
ln looklng aL Lhe mosL reallsLlc plcLure, l seldom suppose LhaL l can llLerally reach lnLo Lhe dlsLance, sllce Lhe
LomaLo, or beaL Lhe drum. 8aLher, l recognlze Lhe lmages as slgns for Lhe ob[ecLs and characLerlsLlcs
represenLed uu slgns LhaL work lnsLanLly and unequlvocally wlLhouL belng confused wlLh whaL Lhey
denoLe.(12)

ln a complemenLary vlew, CesLalL psychology explalned LhaL apparenL moLlon, llke ln
movles, for example, ls noL Lhe resulL of a mlsLake ln Lhe observer's Lhlnklng buL a
"percepLual facL", l.e., a facL as real as Lhe so-called real movemenL. Wolfgang kohler
lronlcally says (13) LhaL lL would be hard Lo convlnce an audlence LhaL Lhe movemenL
percelved ln a movle ls Lhe resulL of Lhousands of mlsLaken [udgemenLs made ln a couple of
mlnuLes. Pe conLends LhaL Lhe apparenL movemenL ls "percepLually real", and LhaL lL proves
LhaL vlsual processes resulLlng from local sLlmulaLlons occurrlng ln dlfferenL places under
parLlcular Lemporal condlLlons do lnLeracL one wlLh Lhe oLher. Llkewlse, one could say LhaL
an apparenL LomaLo ls percepLually real u dlscardlng Lhe meanlngless ldea LhaL holograms
are llluslons. A hologram resembles anoLher hologram more Lhan lL resembles any ob[ecL,
whlch, of course, doesn'L mean LhaL a hologram necessarlly represenLs anoLher hologram.
8epresenLaLlon ls a maLLer of conLexL and llluslon a maLLer of how one undersLands Lhe
relaLlonshlp beLween ob[ecLs and lmages LhaL represenL ob[ecLs. ln lnformal dlscourse Lhe
word llluslon lmplles absoluLe plcLorlal fldellLy or unawareness of Lhe dlsLlncLlon beLween a
represenLaLlon and an ob[ecL, whlch ulLlmaLely does noL occur ln any aesLheLlc seLLlng such
as gallerles or museums.

1he holographlc "real lmage", l.e., Lhe one LhaL sLands ln Lhln alr beLween Lhe vlewer and Lhe
hologram changes our noLlon of depLh, leadlng Lhe layman Lo evenLually say LhaL Lhere ls an
llluslon, LhaL "lL looks as lf Lhe Lhlng was really Lhere". 8audrlllard explalns LhaL holographlc
"real space" provokes a percepLual lnverslon, lL conLradlcLs our expecLaLlons. "lnsLead of
belng ln a vanlshlng fleld for Lhe eye, we flnd ourselves ln a lnverLed depLh, LhaL Lransforms
ourselves ln a vanlshlng polnL"(14). 8uL he Lhlnks LhaL Lhe holographlc lmage has a spaLlal
presence LhaL ellmlnaLes Lhe sense of llluslon usually assoclaLed wlLh convenLlonal
represenLaLlon.

1he hologram ls Lhe lnverLed fasclnaLlon of Lhe end of Lhe llluslon, of Lhe scene, of Lhe
secreL, by means of maLerlallzed pro[ecLlon of all avallable lnformaLlon of Lhe sub[ecL, by
means of maLerlallzed Lransparency. (...) 1he hologram doesn'L have exacLly Lhe lnLelllgence
of Lhe Lrompe-l'oell, whlch ls LhaL of seducLlon, of always proceedlng, accordlng Lo Lhe rules
of appearance, Lhrough alluslon and elllpse of Lhe presence.(13)

Colng furLher wlLh hls argumenL, he concludes LhaL, Lo a cerLaln exLenL, Lhls process
represenLs Lhe end of aesLheLlcs and Lhe Lrlumph of Lhe medlum, llke ln sLereophony, "LhaL
sophlsLlcaLed ln lLself puLs an end Lo Lhe charm and lnLelllgence of muslc."(16) 8uL does
sLereophony puL an end Lo Lhe lnLelllgence of muslc or does lL offer anoLher way, wlLh a
dlfferenL "lnLelllgence", of en[oylng lL? ulfferenL ways of produclng and recordlng muslc wlll
resulL ln dlfferenL ways of llsLenlng, as exempllfled by conLemporary experlmenLal pleces
composed speclflcally for magneLlc Lape. Whlle muslc played llve demands a deducLlve
audlLory response (for waLchlng Lhe muslclans play lnfluences Lhe llsLener's percepLlon of
muslc), recorded muslc suggesLs a more lnducLlve llsLenlng (for sLereo-llsLenlng brlngs only a
parL of Lhe whole spaLlal-acousLlcal experlence of a llve concerL). 1he same ls valld for Lhe
)
hologram: whlle Langlble ob[ecLs and shapes Lrlgger deducLlve percepLlon, holographlc
lmages demand a more lnducLlve percepLual response.

1he percepLual and concepLual experlence of a hologram wlll conLlnue Lo change as new
Lechnologles make posslble new aesLheLlc advenLures. WrlLlng ln 1972, 8udolf Arnhelm
acknowledged Lhe lmpacL of Lhe Lhen new pulsed porLralL:

As holography ls perfecLed, lL beglns Lo exhlblL Lhe Lerrlfylng rlgor morLls of all new advances Loward llluslon. l
look aL Lhe llfe-slze porLralL of Lhe lnvenLor, uennls Cabor. Pe sLands before me ln full volume. As l move from
Lhe lefL Lo Lhe rlghL, l see a parL of hls shlrL LhaL was hldden before by hls [ackeL, and Lhe reflecLlons on hls eye-
glasses change. l see hls head flrsL from Lhe lefL, Lhen from Lhe rlghL. So compleLe ls Lhe llluslon of Lhe man's
Lhree-dlmenslonal presence LhaL hls lmmoblllLy makes hlm a frlghLenlng corpse. 1he sLrengLh of Lhe spell
makes me ungraLefully aware of whaL ls mlsslng. lnsLead of an lmage of a llve man, l see a real ghosL faklng llfe.
lL wlll Lake a whlle before Lhls new advance Loward reallsm loses Lhe power of seemlng Lo be reallLy. lL
happened before wlLh Lhe moLlon plcLure, Lhe sLereoscope, Lhe sound fllm.(17)

ln Lhls observaLlon abouL holography, apparenLly Lhe only one he ever wroLe, Arnhelm dld
noL address Lhe problemaLlc noLlon of "llluslonlsm" and expressed a vlew of lmage-maklng
LhaL one mlghL regard as LalnLed by an evoluLlonlsL poslLlvlsm: holography as progress or
"advance Loward reallsm", whlch he equaLes Lo "advance Loward llluslon". 1o advance
Loward reallsm ls a conLradlcLlon ln Lerms, because Lhe goal of an absoluLe reallsm or
llluslonlsm ls obvlously unaLLalnable, slnce all forms of represenLaLlon work agalnsL Lhe
background of soclal convenLlons whlch change hlsLorlcally. AcLually, Arnhelm's commenLary
reveals oLher lnLeresLlng conLradlcLlons, whlch may resulL from hls unfamlllarlLy wlLh Lhe
medlum or from Lhe aLLempL Lo read Lhe holographlc lmage wlLh Lhe crlLlcal apparaLus one
applles Lo Lhe now famlllar code of sLralghL phoLography. Pow could holography be an
"advance" lf Lhe hologram of a llve man represenLs a "frlghLenlng corpse"? 1hls deflnlLely
sounds more llke a Lechnologlcal seLback uu an unsuccessful aLLempL aL reallsm. Pow can
Lhe llluslon be "compleLe" and sLlll make us aware of whaL ls mlsslng? lL seems LhaL whaL ls
mlsslng ls noL Lhe llvlng sub[ecL of Lhe hologram (Cabor dled ln 1979), buL an appreclaLlon
for Lhe unlque feaLures of Lhls medlum. Arnhelm looked aL Lhe holographlc lmage and dldn'L
read lL as an lmage, buL as a rheLorlcal "ghosL", l.e., Lhe demaLerlallzed appearance of a
person. lL ls as lf Lo Lhe unlnlLlaLe a phoLograph could represenL a llve man, buL a hologram
could noL. ln oLher words, lL ls as lf lL were naLural Lo read phoLographs and unnaLural Lo
read holograms, buL we shall noL loose slghL of Lhe facL LhaL Lhe ease wlLh whlch we look aL
phoLographs Loday was acqulred Lhrough a long culLural process LhaL goes back aL leasL Lo
8runelleschl and AlberLl. 1he raLlonale behlnd hls commenLary breaks down aL Lhe end,
when he menLlons whaL happened Lo fllm and Lhe sLereoscope, whlch no longer seem "Lo be
reallLy". lf Lhese medla losL LhaL mlmeLlc "power" lL ls because Lhelr vlsual convenLlons have
been asslmllaLed by socleLy aL large uu a faLe LhaL awalLs holography and LhaL wlll be
beneflclal Lo lL. Polographlc arL wlll only earn Lhe conslderaLlon lL deserves when Lralned and
unLralned observers allke can look aL a hologram and noL be haunLed by splrlLs, specLers,
apparlLlons, phanLoms, and oLher supernaLural belngs of crlLlcal dlscourse.

Polographlc lmages possess several characLerlsLlcs by means of whlch Lhey represenL Lhlngs
(llke ln a porLralL of a person) or produce self-referenLlal slgns (llke an absLracL composlLlon)
and Lhe sLudy of Lhem all would be beyond Lhe scope of Lhls essay. 1he facL LhaL holographlc
lmages demand blnocular percepLlon ln moLlon (as opposed Lo sLereographs and anaglyphs)
and Lhe facL LhaL Lhey can produce a rellef deslrably ldenLlflable wlLh Lhe rellef of
*
recognlzable ob[ecLs are Lwo promlnenL aspecLs and Lherefore shall be addressed. 8uL we
wlll dlscuss Lhese feaLures ln Lhelr reversed percepLual manlfesLaLlon, Lhe lnslde ouL rellef
and Lhe non-sLereoscoplc vlslon (buL sLlll blnocular), because of Lhelr unlque holographlc
quallLles.

IA !,*CB#,'#!4 /%B 0*$&%/2 0&J/204

ln Lhe slxLles Lhe only klnd of exlsLlng holograms were laser Lransmlsslon holograms, l.e.,
holograms only vlslble by means of a laser. 1hose red lmages dlsplayed ln normal condlLlons
a convex rellef as such. 1he opLlcal rellef, because lL was as convex as Lhe rellef of Lhe ob[ecL,
was called "orLhoscophlc", from Lhe Creek "orLhos" (rlghL). 8uL lf Lhe llghL source was kepL ln
place and Lhe hologram fllpped around, Lhe rellef appeared concave. 1he lnverslon also
happened lf Lwo ob[ecLs were used as models, one ln fronL of Lhe oLher. 1he one LhaL
appeared closer ln Lhe scene appeared furLher way ln Lhe lmage. 1hls overall reverslon was
named "pseudoscoplc", from Lhe Creek "pseudo" (false) and ls caused by dlffracLed llghL
rays crlsscrosslng ln fronL of Lhe fllm plane.
1he "pseudoscoplc" phenomenon was dlscussed ln 1868 by Perman von PelmholLz. SLudylng
Lhe lmage formed ln a sLereoscope, where Lwo flaL phoLos Laken from a dlsLance
correspondenL Lo Lhe dlsLance of human eyes are seen slmulLaneously Lo glve Lhe
lmpresslon of rellef, PelmholLz observed LhaL Lhe percepLlon of rellef and solldlLy was noL
produced by Lhe movemenL of Lhe eyes buL by blnocular percepLlon. Pe descrlbed an
experlmenL LhaL showed LhaL Lhe lmpresslon of rellef was sLlll produced ln a sLereoscope
desplLe lL belng lllumlnaLed wlLh an elecLrlc spark of very shorL duraLlon. 1he spark lasLed for
less Lhan Lhe four LhousandLh of a second, durlng whlch Lhere could noL have been,
accordlng Lo PelmholLz, any recognlzable movemenL of Lhe eyes. Pe also noLed LhaL Lhe
lmage percelved wlLh Lhe rlghL eye ls dlfferenL from Lhe one percelved wlLh Lhe lefL eye,
"oLherwlse we should noL be able Lo dlsLlngulsh Lhe Lrue from Lhe lnverLed or
"pseudoscoplc" rellef, when Lwo sLereoscoplc plcLures are lllumlnaLed by Lhe elecLrlc spark."
(18) PelmholLz descrlbes Lhe pseudoscoplc lmage on Lhe sLereoscope saylng LhaL "whaL
should be furLher off seems nearer, whaL should sLand ouL seems Lo fall back."(19).
1he volumeLrlc lmage ln holography, as opposed Lo Lhe sLereograph, has Lhe quallLy of
reverslng lLself ln all dlmenslons, Lhe Lhree-dlmenslons of space and LhaL of Llme Loo. lL
makes no ulLlmaLe dlsLlncLlon beLween lefL and rlghL, beLween up or down, beLween
surfaces of curvaLure poslLlve or negaLlve, beLween Lemporal lncrease or decrease. 8uL
lnsLead of Lravellng Lhrough Lhe looklng-glass, Lhe holographlc lmage Lravels Lhe oLher way:
lL draws ouL Lhe lmage from lnslde Lhe mlrror Lo our space. 1he pseudoscoplc and Lhe
orLhoscoplc lmages are symmeLrlc ln relaLlon Lo Llme, when shavlng or maklng up ln fronL of
a mlrror, a person moves Lo Lhe rlghL Lo see Lhe lefL slde of hls or her own lmage. 1o see Lhe
lefL slde of a pseudoscoplc lmage, Lhe beholder has Lo move Lo hls or her lefL slde. 1o see Lhe
underslde of Lhe pseudoscoplc lmage, Lhe beholder has Lo move upwards. ercepLlon Lakes
place ln Llme, even lf lL ls a reverslble Llme.
1hls unusual percepLual experlence has a correspondenL model ln hyslcs, where "Llme
reflecLlon symmeLry" holds LhaL any physlcal slLuaLlon should be reverslble ln Llme.
"Accordlng Lo Lhls prlnclple, lf Llme could be reversed (l.e. run backwards) Lhe Llme reflecLlon
of a parLlcular physlcal slLuaLlon would correspond Lo whaL one would normally see by
reflecLlng Lhe slLuaLlon ln a space mlrror, excepL LhaL all Lhe parLlcles would be replaced by
Lhelr anLl-parLlcles."(20) ln a slmllar buL dlsLlncL way, Lhe pseudoscoplc lmage replaces rellef
"+
by anLl-rellef, lefL-rlghL parlLy by anLl-parlLy and dlrecLlon by anLl-dlrecLlon. lor Lhe
holographlc arLlsL, pseudoscopy mlghL be more Lhan a sLereoscoplc "rellef lnverslon", lL
mlghL be one posslble elemenL for Lhe creaLlon of unexpecLed rhyLhms and lmages wlLh
hlghly unpredlcLable volumes.
ln hls lnvesLlgaLlon of Lhe sLereoscoplc lmage, PelmholLz also noLlced LhaL blnocular vlslon
does noL slmply coalesce Lhe Lwo dlsLlncL lmages pro[ecLed on Lhe reLlnas. Pe advocaLed
LhaL lf one of Lhe plcLures ln Lhe sLereoscoplc palr ls whlLe and Lhe oLher black, Lhe resulLlng
plcLure appears Lo shlne. 1hls phenomenon, called "sLereoscoplc lusLre", accordlng Lo
PelmholLz proved LhaL a "compleLe comblnaLlon of Lhe lmpresslons produced upon boLh
reLlnae" does noL Lake place, because lf LhaL would be Lhe case "Lhe unlon of whlLe and black
would glve grey."(21)
We know LhaL our normal percepLlon of ob[ecLs ln Lhe world ouL Lhere depends on Lhe facL
LhaL each eye sees a sllghLly dlfferenL vlew of Lhe same ob[ecL , unlLlng boLh vlews lnLo a
coherenL whole: whaL we call, afLer !ulesz, cyclopean vlslon.(22) 1he regularlLy of Lhls
prlnclple reflecLs Lhe consLancy of Lhe condlLlons of observaLlon LhaL we have, whlch helps
us ln Lhe elaboraLlon of concepLs abouL Lhe world based on Lhls regularlLy, llke Lhe
relaLlonshlp beLween whaL ls seen as solld ob[ecLs and whaL ls felL by Louch as solld ob[ecLs.
1he acLlon of Lhe senses as an lnLerconnecLed sysLem also reflecLs Lhls regularlLy LhaL
grounds our blnocular vlslon. !ean Clalr argues LhaL for an arLlsL llke uuchamp, "who was
repelled by Lhe physlcallLy, Lhe odorous corporeallLy, of palnLlng, by lLs excesslve groundlng
ln Lhe sensory world, Lhe sLereoscoplc lmage showed Lhe way Lo a purely ldeal conflguraLlon,
Lhe lnLelllglble resulL of a synLhesls cerLalnly closer Lo Lhe braln R and Lo Lhe worklng of a
cosa menLale R Lhan Lo Lhe reLlnal effecL." (23)
AlLhough noL havlng had any furLher arLlsLlc consequence before holography, whaL
PelmholLz descrlbed as "reLlnal rlvalry" ln Lhe sLereoscoplc lmage ls a cosa menLale LhaL
challenges Lhe regularlLy of our percepLlon of Lhree-dlmenslonal ob[ecLs ln Lhe world. 1hls ls
how PelmholLz descrlbed lL:

1here are some very curlous and lnLeresLlng phenomena seen when Lwo plcLures are puL before Lhe Lwo eyes
aL Lhe same Llme whlch cannoL be comblned so as Lo presenL Lhe appearance of a slngle ob[ecL. lf, for example,
we look wlLh one eye aL a page of prlnL, and wlLh Lhe oLher aL an engravlng, Lhere follows whaL ls called Lhe
"rlvalry" of Lhe Lwo flelds of vlslon. 1he Lwo lmages are noL Lhen seen aL Lhe same Llme, one coverlng Lhe oLher:
buL aL some polnLs one prevalls, and aL oLhers Lhe oLher. (...) Pence Lhe reLlnal rlvalry ls noL a Lrlal of sLrengLh
beLween Lwo sensaLlons, buL depends upon our flxlng or falllng Lo flx Lhe aLLenLlon. (...) lf we leave Lhe mlnd aL
llberLy wlLhouL a flxed lnLenLlon Lo observe a deflnlLe ob[ecL, LhaL alLernaLlon beLween Lhe Lwo plcLures ensues
whlch ls called reLlnal rlvalry.(24)

1hls phenomenon can also be observed holographlcally, buL ln a somewhaL dlfferenL way.
llrsL, ln Lhe sLereoscope Lhe Lwo flaL lmages are placed slde by slde, deflnlng very clearly
whlch eye sees whaL lmage. ln Lhe hologram, all lmages are recorded slmulLaneously on Lhe
emulslon and lL ls Lhe dlffracLed llghL LhaL sends Lowards each eye a dlfferenL lmage, maklng
lL harder Lo know "from where" Lhe lmage ls comlng. Second, whlle ln Lhe sLereoscope each
lmage remalns flaL, ln holography each lmage can be fully Lhree-dlmenslonal, whlch makes
focuslng of Lhe eyes more complex. 1hlrd, aL lasL, vlslon ln Lhe sLereoscope ls moLlonless,
whlle ln holography, as ln normal vlslon, Lhe eyes move relaLlve Lo whaL Lhey see, scannlng
Lhe spaLlal amalgam of Lhe rlvallng lmages.


""
Some holographlc arL pleces wlll dlsplay a very complex fleld, Lhe componenLs of whlch can
only be seen, ln dlsconLlnuous fashlon, when Lhe eyes of Lhe beholder are placed ln Lhe
dlrecLlon of Lhe dlffracLed llghL. ln Lhose cases, Lhe amounL of recorded lnformaLlon, and Lhe
way Lhls lnformaLlon ls presenLed, neuLrallzes Lhe acLlon of blnocular vlslon as a sysLem LhaL
unlfles Lwo dlfferenL vlews lnLo a slngle one. 1he expecLaLlons broughL by Lhe vlewer are
neuLrallzed as well, and he or she cannoL percelve lndlvldual solld ob[ecLs buL an
lnconslsLenL fleld, where ob[ecLs and forms shlfL and coalesce.
8eLlnal rlvalry becomes Lherefore one elemenL ln Lhe vocabulary of holography, esLabllshlng
a new vlsual parameLer. ln holography lL ls noL an excepLlonal sLrucLure or [usL a "curlous
experlmenL", as PelmholLz descrlbes lL ln Lhe case of Lhe sLereoscope. lL ls a dlsLlncLlve
feaLure LhaL checkmaLes our percepLual and symbollc convenLlons, for our response Lo vlsual
sLlmull depends, as we have seen, upon hablLs and condlLlons of observaLlon. lf each of our
eyes percelves an absoluLely dlfferenL lmage, vlslon becomes a somewhaL more complex
and lnLense process, and demands wlLh lL LhaL Lhe beholder quesLlons Lhe very naLure of hls
prevlous experlences.

IA!"#$#%&' )*+,. $&-*KB#-/&% "#2#30/!"4

We need noL examlne ln deLall Lhe Lechnlcal developmenL of auLomaLlc lmaglng sysLems,
from early nlneLeenLh cenLury unLll now, Lo undersLand LhaL lL creaLed Lhe hlsLorlcal,
aesLheLlc, and maLerlal condlLlons for Lhe currenL dlglLal synLhesls of holographlc lmages. ln
a clear developmenL of palnLlng's asplraLlon Lo LruLh and veraclLy, phoLography flrsL
aLLempLed Lo flx lmages as seen ln naLure. 1he camera obscura, used by palnLers for
cenLurles, became Lhe phoLographer's essenLlal Lool. ln Lhe nexL sLage, phoLographers Lrled
Lo capLure dlfferenL momenLs of an acLlon. Muybrldge's analysls of moLlon and Marey's
chronophoLography paved Lhe way for clnema. As a consequence, Ldlson and Lhe Luml re
broLhers showed LhaL lmages represenLlng moLlon could noL only be recorded as sLllls buL
seL Lo moLlon Lhemselves, allowlng us Lo see represenLaLlons of Lhe recorded evenLs as a
Lemporal flux. Much laLer, vldeo Lechnology lnsLanLlaLed Lhe recordlng, ellmlnaLlng Lhe
Lemporal gap beLween Lhe acLlon and lLs playlng back and, Lherefore, relnforclng Lhe
congrulLy beLeween Lhe represenLaLlon and Lhe reference. More recenLly, personal
compuLers seem Lo have demollshed phoLography's LruLh amblLlon by allowlng anyone Lo
manlpulaLe phoLographlc lmages and Lo easlly recomblne Lhem ln any deslred way. lf
phoLography forced palnLlng Lo redeflne lLs dlrecLlon ln Lhe beglnnlng and mlddle of Lhe
nlneLeenLh cenLury, Loday compuLers have a slmllar lmpacL on phoLography. Pow does
holography flL ln Lhls conLexL? Polograms are already rouLlnely synLheslzed from secondary
sources, lncludlng sllver phoLography, vldeo, fllm, senslng devlces, and compuLer graphlcs.
Many holograms creaLed Loday lnvolve elecLronlc lmage manlpulaLlon and dlglLal synLhesls,
and draw from oLher arLlsLlc flelds, such as phoLography, fllm, and vldeo. 1hese holograms
explore Llme more lnLenslvely Lhan holograms creaLed wlLhouL Lhe compuLer and reveal a
very lmporLanL aspecL of Lhe medlum. A loL of Lhe compuLer holograms creaLed by sclenLlsLs
or commerclal holographers are moLlonless, or aL besL have very llmlLed moLlon, because
Lhelr lmages usually alm aL reproduclng a vlrLual envlronmenL or ob[ecL wlLh Lhe vlsual
sLablllLy Lyplcal of laser holography. Slnce Lhe ob[ecL ln mosL laser holograms ls Lhree-
dlmenslonal and sLaLlonary, many holographers use Lhe compuLer Lo make sLaLlonary vlrLual
ob[ecLs. Polograms Lhus produced emphaslze space lnsLead of Llme, and volume lnsLead of
movemenL.
"#
8ased on a sLudy publlshed elsewhere,(23) l have ldenLlfled seven domalns of holographlc
Lemporal manlfesLaLlon. noL suggesLlng a hlerarchy or Lhe absoluLe predomlnance of one
caLhegory over Lhe oLher, l propose a crlLlcal Laxonomy based on Lhe presence or absence of
sequenclal lmagery and Lhe naLure of lLs manlfesLaLlon ln space. Whlle lL ls obvlous LhaL
many of Lhese ldenLlfled Llme-feaLures wlll coexhlsL ln cerLaln klnds of holograms, lL ls also
Lrue LhaL ln many cases one feaLure mlghL be predomlnanL ln deLermlnlng Lhe klnd of
experlence Lhe vlewer has wlLh Lhe plece. WhaL follows charLs holography as an arL of Llme
and organlzes lLs sLrucLure accordlng Lo seven prlnclples:

1. S?MuL1AnLlSM. Polograms LhaL presenL Lhe vlewer wlLh one sLaLlonary ob[ecL or
consLrucLlon organlze Lhe space so LhaL lL can be lmmedlaLely and slmmulLaneously
percelved by Lwo or more observers ln llke manner. 1hls allows Lhe vlewer Lo probe a space
LhaL remalns conslsLenL for Lhe duraLlon of Lhe experlence. MosL of !ohn kauffman's colored
rock pleces would fall under Lhls caLegory.
2. 1lML SuSLnSlCn. When a hologram ls made LhaL capLures llghL phenomena as lLs
sub[ecL maLLer, Lhe dynamlc behavlor of llghL paLLerns ls suspended aL Lhe momenL of
recordlng. Whenever lllumlnaLed, Lhe hologram becomes acLlve agaln and ln lLs dlffracLlve
power reacLlvaLes Lhe paLLerned choreography of Lhe orlglnal propagaLlon. aul newman's
LlghL lorms are a good example.

3. l8LLZlnC. A holographlc frozen momenL lmplles Lhe use of a pulse so shorL LhaL lL
capLures a symulLanelsL scene ouL of an orlglnal dynamlc conLexL, ln whlch free moLlon ls noL
a consLralnL. ParrleL Casdln-Sllver's recenL serles of hybrld nudes may be lncluded here.

4. LlnLA8l1?. A llnear hologram ls one ln whlch a serle of lmages ls sLored ln such a sequence
LhaL lLs frames are meanL Lo be experlenced ln a parLlcular order. Any oLher dlrecLlonal
readlngs become dlsLracLlve ln Lhls case. vlcLor komar's holomovles are as llnear as
LradlLlonal movles.

3. 1lML-8LvL8SA8lLl1?. Polographlc lmages can be concelved Lo be seen ln a flux LhaL ls bl-
dlrecLlonal. no beglnnlng ls lmplled and no concluslve end ls suggesLed. 1he experlence of
Llme-reverslble holograms revolves around Lhe posslblllLy of ellmlnaLlng opposlLlons such as
forward and backward, slnce Lhese Lwo become equlvalenL. uean 8andazzo's asquallna, for
example, explores Lonal LransformaLlons LhaL are meanL Lo be reverslble ln Llme.

6. ulSCCn1lnul1?. ulsconLlnuos holograms break wlLh Lhe homogenous Lhree-dlmenslonal
space reconsLrucLed by a symulLanelsL hologram, shaLLerlng lL lnLo dlscreLe vlewlng zones.
1hese vlewlng zones can only be seen from resLrlcLed polnLs of vlew. 1he space creaLed ls
mulLlfaceLed, wlLh conLrolled zones of vlslblllLy, gaps, and vlsual leaps. Many of 8udy
8erkhouL's early holograms explore Lhls prlnclple.

7. 8LAL-1lML. 8eal-Llme holography ls compuLed on-Lhe-fly and pro[ecLed freely ln space ln
response Lo Lhe vlewer's command. 1hls "holographlc vldeo" can be conLrolled Lhrough Lhe
use of dlals and oLher klnds of lnLerface. SLlll ln Lhe early sLages of Lechnologlcal
developmenL, Lhls Lechnlque has noL been explored by arLlsLs yeL. 1he mosL promlnenL
example ls Lhe apparaLus belng experlmenLally developed aL Lhe MassachusseLLs lnsLlLuLe of
1echnology. Cne day we wlll speak of real Llme Lransmlsslon of holographlc lmages.
"$
ln an arLlcle dlscusslng Lhe unlqueness of Lhe dlglLal movlng lmage as dlsLlncL from oLher
forms of clnema, Cene ?oungblood wroLe: "Clnema ls Lhe arL of organlzlng a sLream of
audlovlsual evenLs ln Llme. lL ls an evenL-sLream, llke muslc. 1here are aL leasL four medla
Lhrough whlch we can pracLlce clnema uu fllm, vldeo, holography, and sLrucLured dlglLal
code uu[usL as Lhere are many lnsLrumenLs Lhrough whlch we can pracLlce muslc. Cf course
each medlum has dlsLlncL properLles and conLrlbuLes dlfferenLly Lo Lhe Lheory of clnema,
each expands our knowledge of whaL clnema can be and do."(26) 1hls observaLlon ls of
parLlcular lnLeresL because lL emphaslzes holography as a Llme-based medlum, and noL as a
Lhree-dlmenslonal lmaglng Lechnlque. 1he prospecL of dlglLal holographlc movles of Lhe
fuLure noLwlLhsLandlng, Lhe mulLlmedla naLure of Lhe compuLer compels us Lo a redeflnlLlon
or, aL leasL, Lo an expanded deflnlLlon of whaL holography ls. CompuLer holography, as
pracLlced by a small buL lncreaslng number of arLlsLs around Lhe world, mulLlplles Lhe
expresslve posslblllLles of Lhe medlum and asserLs Llme, expressed as changes and
LransformaLlons, as lLs maln aesLheLlc feaLure. Polograms become lnLeracLlve evenLs LhaL
can be percelved ln any dlrecLlon, forward or backward, fasL or slow, dependlng on Lhe
relaLlve poslLlon and speed of Lhe vlewer. unllke Lhe unldlrecLlonal "evenL-sLream" of fllm
and muslc, as menLloned by ?oungblood, four-dlmenslonal holograms are "buoyanL evenLs"
wlLh no beglnnlng or end. 1he vlewer can sLarL looklng aL any polnL. 1lme ls suspended from
lLs exLended conLlnuum and can flow forward or backward.
1he compuLer sparks a unlque form of vlsual Lhlnklng ln whlch vlsuallzaLlon of concepLs
becomes almosL lnsLanLaneous and any hypoLhesls ls LesLed by means of lmmedlaLe
pracLlcal experlmenLaLlon. WlLh holographlc vldeo and deskLop holographlc laser prlnLers
belng developed Loday lL ls clear LhaL ln Lhe fuLure holography wlll merge wlLh dlglLal
lmaglng sysLems ln new and unforeseen ways. ln "ueslgn and lmmaLerlallLy",(27) Abraham
Moles observed: "ueslgn by holographlc models may sLlll be far ln Lhe fuLure, buL Lhe
concreLe acLlvlLy of deslgn even now parLakes subsLanLlally of lmmaLerlal Lechnlques, or
usage of arLlflclal represenLaLlons, lmages, and dlagrams composed by lmage-generaLlng
machlnes." 1hls ls also Lrue ln Lhe flne arLs and one can only expecL Lhls usage of lmmaLerlal
Lechnlques Lo lncrease. Cr, as lrank opper puL lL, "Lhe fuLure of holographlc arL lles no
doubL ln lLs comblnaLlon wlLh vldeo and/or compuLer arL."(28)

LA '#%'2C,&#%

Cne of Lhe facLs LhaL make lL dellcaLe Lo dlscuss holography from a non-Lechnlcal polnL of
vlew ls Lhe hlsLorlcal lnfancy of Lhe medlum. 8y Lrylng Lo address some of Lhe key lssues of
holography Loday we are puLLlng ourselves ln Lhe poslLlon of Lhe essaylsL LhaL, around 1869,
Lrled Lo encompass Lhe culLural meanlng of phoLography. lL ls clear LhaL by Lhen
phoLography had already been popularlzed Lo a cerLaln exLenL, buL no argumenL should be
furLher developed concernlng Lhe LransformaLlons LhaL Lhe medlum wenL Lhrough ln Lhe
followlng one hundred and LwenLy years. When nadar phoLographed arls from a balloon,
he could never lmaglne LhaL an arLlflclal saLelllLe would ln Lhe fuLure phoLograph arls from
ouLer space.
We have already seen holographlc lmages produced from saLelllLe orblLs. Would Lhese
lmages symbollze LhaL more Lhan one hundred years from now holography wlll play a ma[or
soclal role, comparable Lo whaL phoLography means soclally Loday? lL ls hard Lo say.
Polography ls a new medlum, and as such ls already remapplng our percepLlon of Lhe world.
As observed llngulsL lerdlnand de Saussure, recalllng physlclsL nlels 8ohr's dlcLum, "lar from
"%
lL belng Lhe ob[ecL LhaL anLedaLes Lhe vlewpolnL, lL would seem LhaL lL ls Lhe vlewpolnL LhaL
creaLes Lhe ob[ecL"(29) , and ln holography Lhe vlewpolnL ls an ever changlng one.

LA 0*1*0*%'*,
1 - Cf. WesLon naef, "Percules llorence, lnvenLor do (slc) hoLographla", ArLforum, new ?ork,
lebruary, 1976, p. 38, also 8orls kossoy, "Percules llorence, l'lnvenLeur en exll", Les MulLlples
lnvenLlons de la hoLographle, MlnlsL re de la CulLure, arls, 1988, p.73, and naoml 8osenblum, A
world hlsLory of phoLography, Cross 8lver ress, new ?ork, 1984, p. 193.
2 - Cabor made hls flrsL hologram wlLh a fllLered mercury-arc lamp.
3 - Susan SLewarL, Cn Longlng, 1he !ohns Popklns unlverslLy ress, 8alLlmore, 1984, p. 12.
4 - nelson Coodman, "8eallLy 8emade", Languages of ArL, PackeLL ubllshlng Company, lndlanapolls,
1976, p. 14.
3 - "8eallLy 8emade", p.36.
6 - !ean 8audrlllard, "Pologrammes", Slmulacres eL SlmulaLlon, CalllZe, arls, 1981, p. 138.
7 - "Pologrammes", pp. 160-161.
8 - "Pologrammes", p.162.
9 - "8eallLy 8emade", p. 38.
10 - LrnsL Combrlch, "llluslon and ArL", llluslon ln naLure and ArL, LdlLed by 8.L. Cregory and L.P.
Combrlch, Cerald uuckworLh, London, 1973, pp. 193-196.
11 - 8enZ uescarLes, ulopLrlcs, hllosophlcal WrlLlngs, 1ranslaLed and edlLed by LllzabeLh Anscombe
and eLer 1homas Ceach, 1homas nelson and Sons, London, 1971, pp. 243-244.
12 - "8eallLy 8emade", p. 33.
13 - Wolfgang kohler, 1he 1ask of CesLalL sychology, rlnceLon unlverslLy ress, rlnceLon, 1969,
p.39.
14 - "Pologrammes", p.138.
13 - "Pologrammes", pp.138-139.
16 - "Pologrammes", p.139.
17 - 8udolf Arnhelm, arables of Sun LlghL, CbservaLlons on sychology, 1he ArLs, and Lhe 8esL,
unlverslLy of Callfornla ress, 8erkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1989, p.137.
18 - Permann von PelmholLz, "1he recenL progress of Lhe Lheory of vlslon", PelmholLz on ercepLlon:
lLs hyslology and uevelopmenL, LdlLed by 8lchard Warren and 8oslyn Warren, !ohn Wlley and Sons,
new ?ork, London, Sydney, 1968, p.123.
19 - "1he recenL progress of Lhe Lheory of vlslon", p.122.
20 - L.8. uvarov, u.8.Chapman, Alan lsaacs, 1he enguln ulcLlonary of Sclence, enguln 8ooks,
Mlddlesex, 1983, p.431.
21 - 8ela !ulesz, loundaLlons of Cyclopean ercepLlon, unlverslLy of Chlcago ress, Chlcago and
London, 1971.
22 - "1he recenL progress of Lhe Lheory of vlslon", p. 121.
23 - !ean Clalr, "CpLlcerles", CcLober, Ml1 ress, 8osLon, Summer 1978, p.104. 24 - "1he recenL
progress of Lhe Lheory of vlslon", pp.122-123.
23 - Lduardo kac, "8eyond Lhe SpaLlal aradlgm: 1lme and ClnemaLlc lorm ln Polographlc ArL,"
8LlM lllm Magazlne, lall 1993, Craz, AusLrla.
26 - Cene ?oungblood, "Clnema and Lhe code", Leonardo, CompuLer ArL ln ConLexL SupplemenLal
lssue, 1989, p. 27.
27 - Abraham Moles, "ueslgn and lmmaLerlallLy: WhaL of lL ln a osLlndusLrlal SocleLy?", ln 1he
lmmaLerlal SocleLy, ueslgn, CulLure, and 1echnology ln Lhe osLmodern World, Marco ulanl, ed.,
(Lnglewood Cllffs, n!: renLlce Pall, 1992), p. 30.
28 - lrank opper, "1he lace of Plgh-1echnology ArL ln Lhe ConLemporary Scene," Leonardo, vol. 26,
no. 1, 1993, p. 66.
29 - lerdlnand de Saussure, Course ln Ceneral LlngulsLlcs, LdlLed by Cahrles 8ally and AlberL
Sechehaye. 1ranslaLed by Wade 8askln. Mc Craw-Plll, new ?ork,1939, p.8.