《数码印刷的真实性-毕业论文外文翻译.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《数码印刷的真实性-毕业论文外文翻译.docx（10页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、毕业论文外文文献翻译毕业设计（论文）题目基于数码印刷质量控制参数翻译题目数码印刷的真实性学 院专 业姓 名班 级学 号指导教师杭州电子科技大学信息工程学院本科毕业论文外文翻译数码印刷的真实性1 对于那些目前正在进行数字印花纺织品领域内的研究和实践，不足的界限可能会导致混乱和误解。本文旨在澄清数字印刷的术语是什么意思，和定位在它的真实性，通过比较，摄影，以便更好地解释目前围绕纺织品数码印刷的一些背景问题。 量程范围从最初的想法形成了以数字文件形式存储在计算机上，通过打印头的数字图像打印机，随后蒸固定在织物基材染料沉积液滴的行为。然而，有许多流程和技术，涉及数字印刷，其中没有独特纺织品数码印刷;个
2、别技术，根据剑桥大学安迪霍珀，“也可以被用来制造高价值，高精密产品如平板显示器，印刷电子，光伏电池发电（2010）。此外，作者萨拉布拉多克克拉克指出，计算机只是一种工具，所以它不是电脑，而是艺术家或设计师，谁使审美的决定“（2007年：178）。尽管如此，这些技术越来越复杂，当代纺织艺术家，设计师和手工艺人的奖励和美观具有挑战性的机会。 1.简介 这种做法领导的研究项目问：如何可以通过精心设计的做法可以作为在数字印刷的纺织品干预？为了解决这个问题，它是必不可少的澄清什么构成了数字印刷纺织品，并在晶界存在应被理解为一个数字打印的打印。这是必要的，使潜在的干预措施可能被发现，有针对性的，并证明在此
3、区域内的研究和实践。 布拉多克拉克强调，电脑仅仅是一个工具，创意输入并非来自工具，而是从艺术家或设计师，她表示支持这一观点，即创造性的工作，机器哲学家约翰杜威这两种产品想象力，但不像机器，一个工件进行富有想象力的工作在物理世界。的工件和机器之间的鸿沟，越来越多地在当代实践中走过，部分原因是由于技术所提供的广泛的机会;，纺织设计师Alex罗素解释说，设计正在成为更多关于“比各具特色的审美选择”（2007， 2005：285）。虽然隐性知识和创造力在计算机以外的存在，这多余的状态也延伸到数字印刷过程中固有的其他技术。之前，它印在数字图像，例如，纺织，作为编码存储在计算机上的文件，这个文件代表了一系
4、列创造性的艺术家或设计师的判断。但是，该文件仅仅是一个步骤的过程中，产生一个数字印刷内。虽然这个文件的一个版本可以描述为一个光源图像在屏幕上，但它确实没有T构成的过程中的一个必要步骤。这仅仅是一个参考的机会重温一种非物质产生的图像在创建初始文件版本，屏幕有所不同，审美素质的差异前夕n这个图像是责任。该文件随后被数字印刷在衬底上，并且，在大幅面喷墨打印机的情况下，所得到的纺织蒸染料固定。此染料为主的图像显示，也显着影响，使用的织物，广泛的美学。 2.正文哲学家本雅明告诉我们，原来坐落在时间和空间的神器，正是这种功能，允许其真实性有待衡量（1963年：3）。他区分再现过程中，重放的机制，和权利要求
5、书中的过程被重复，而不是设计或创建原始图像的行为。所以，当我们打印数码打印，或致电数字印刷的图像，或确实走那么远的说，这是一个数字印刷，数字印刷，我们可能首先想到的，我们确定原件或正宗的版本，打印，可能没有任何这样的事情。本文提出原厂正品，用于创建一个可重复的打印出的图像的处理和必要的技术的范围内的某处，从计算机内的初始文件，打印出的图像之前，蒸和固定;某处最终打印前纺织成为一个独立的实体，一个从最初的视觉有一个非常不同的审美，作为编码存储在计算机上的文件，之前，它被印在基板上。基板的数字印刷不仅影响最终的审美，它的色调，触感，颜色，等，但这个纺织品的选择将影响数字印刷的未来存在。该决定规定的
6、功能，或进入其中，数字印花织物可形成产品，这反过来将影响印花织物的寿命以及数字印刷的旅程将在其一生中。因此，数字打印的思想或观念取决于许多变量，就可以了，但是只在有限的范围内，规定的范围内的初始设计过程中的因素。所需的各种元素产生一个纺织数码打印不作为一个，因此，不能被形容为一个“黑盒子”（拉图尔，1987：130）。本杰明认为，真实性反映，除其他功能，能够显示或拥有原来的“身体状况”的属性，与原来的“所有权”的变化，但他还写道，为一门学科，如摄影，不允许复制品作出搜索一个明确的原始照片，这是徒劳的，因为他说，在这种情况下，没有摄影照片是真实的（1936年：4）。然而，本文认为，这是不在数字印
7、刷纺织品的情况下，虽然有清楚地照片的负和文件的数字图像之间的相似性：例如，两个代表用于再现一个单一的车辆，是能够之前被操纵多个印刷和允许要打印的多个版本，但是，单一的物理项目，数码印刷的对口包括不是一个，而是整个物质的和非物质的成分加上各种流程和技术范围，而照片的不从数字文件的染料分散数字打印头到纺织（但不包括数字与在其上的分散的染料的最终独立基板）（本杰明，1936年：4）。因此，建议的是，术语数字印刷应该包括若干个进程，包括数字文件和数字的数字印刷的染料分散，但不是染料形成的图像，这一点，像照片，副产品或后数字印刷过程中的条件。 3.意义让我们摄影，和哲学家Vilm弗鲁塞尔定义什么是真正的
8、反映，而不是什么是正宗的。他认可以被归类为前提的，创建一个初始的图像作为的行为编码的文件，该图像和最终的染料为主的版本同样可以被描述为先决条件（弗鲁塞尔，1983年：37）。负简称由本杰明，他声称，真实的，而这将意味着，前提条件是正宗外，换句话说，作为一个边界什么构成原始的身体状况和原所有权变更，因为这些地道的行为边界定义的真正的摄影过程中，可以认为它们具有类似的。边界，本文的目的，可以说，这意味着它们都可以设在同一地区同场。另一位法国哲学家莫里斯梅洛 庞蒂的图像，无论其生产或再生产的方法，是不是设在观众告诉我们，这是外面的人。一个想编织使两个非接触的实体之间的连接，和它是研究者的信仰，该数字
9、图像是唯一的真正的时，它成为集成到这样一个织造集有关图像的想法位于该文件和之间的某个地方纺织品的表面。但是，要实现这一目标，必须保留的数字打印的边界图像文件和图像染料的链接，穿越两个不同的媒体，非物质和材料。如果梅洛庞蒂建议就在不同媒体的创意，这些过程都不具备可比性的审美特质或属性，然后进行系统的等效必须存在，将它们连接起来（1960年：142）。因此，对于数字打印，可重复性，本文建议，需要有一个可行的常数，在这种情况下，构成地道的移动媒体，其特征在于，包括将图像作为数字文件附加数字印刷材料的图像在该点的输出。再现装置的组成部分是：打印机，但是打印机的印刷和数字文件需要的东西，但在打印机中的数
10、字文件不存在，它是在计算机上。因此，再现装置也要求在计算机和打印机被视为相互依存的，因此这两个数字印刷纺织品作为一个单一实体的目的，应考虑。 4.关键因素四个关键因素影响或决定什么将成为历史的数字印刷纺织：1.原始图像的视觉上的美感;2.的生产过程;3.生产的机制;4.的基片在其上的图像数字印刷。本杰明写道：“一件事的真实性是一切，是从一开始传播的本质，其证词的历史，它经历了实质性的持续时间不等。”其未来的历史见证包含的边界之外，我们有什么定义为数码打印，但是当本杰明指出，正宗的开始和未来的历史证明，那么可以肯定的界限的本质之间存在的本质数字印刷的那些是相同的？毕竟，所有传播的本质，也可以被描
11、述为能够在时间和空间到另一个，从一个地方输送。在这个意义上说，流程，技术，物质和非物质组合在一起，它定义了数字印刷，可以适当保持完整并通过时间和空间移动，被原封不动地传输，在可比的状态（虽然能够不断恶化，根据影响的时间）的方式适合本杰明的定义。见证意味着，见证东西（柯林斯，1994年：1763）。它不一定必须要亲身经历，所以历史可以体验由第三方见证，又是其证据。因此，通过预先确定的未来的因素，它的存在，可以说这方面的证据可以说是存在的情况下，联合的工艺，技术，材料和非物质组成部分的数字打印。更重要的是，这一实质性的存在显然是传播功能，增强本文的信仰理由边界构成的数字印刷的真实性。然而，这些注定
12、了明天的因素，也将影响未来纺织喷墨系统的黑盒子的性质。5.结论得出这样的结论：数字图像构成的计算机上的文件，以及数字印刷是图像文件结合图像作为染料。具有独立的打印头的喷墨打印机打印的数字图像，但是作为数字打印需要被使用的数字文件印刷，数字印刷过程必须被包括作为一个联合的过程，涉及的数字文件的打印动作这意味着使用数字打印机的数字文件的数字打印。没有这些组合工艺和技术，包括物质和非物质，就没有数字印刷。那么，什么是正宗的数字印刷？研究者建议不同于负的照片，它允许产生多个复制品，纺织品中，数字印刷需要不是一个产品或工件，但所描述的一系列处理，技术，材料和非物质的组成部分，从而实现再现，并且每个组件，
13、程序或技术，是否在最后的数字印刷纺织品赋予其自己单独的审美，结果集合中的美学接合时，产生一个复杂的美学特征的数字印刷纺织品。事实上，许多，还是可以的，复制，每进行一个独特的存在，确定不同期货，加强正宗的数字印刷的概念，这些独立的纺织件之前。由于编码的文件通知打印头，打印头是无效的，没有合适的信息后采取行动，必须采取行动的文件和打印头的大脑和手（作为一种工具）相同的方式，但一旦染料从喷墨打印机中移除，然后固定到纺织，其真实性丢失，印花织物是许多与自己的未来，不同的所有权，审美功能，审美欣赏。因此，对每一个数字的打印，作为一个结果，它被形成为在空间和时间之内的商品可能会发生改变，将它与数字印刷的界
14、限内真实性。然而，对于艺术家，设计师或工匠，有太多的满意创建数码打印不再是正宗的，但有可能去从事，刺激精彩的对话，进一步艺术家，设计师，手工艺人或决策者之间，谁又将为未来发展数字印花织物的寿命期间，将投资自己的审美和隐性知识。参考文献1 Benjamin, W. 1936. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, London: Penguin. 2 Braddock Clarke, S. E. and OMahony, M. 2007. Techno Textiles 2: Revolutionary Fabrics fo
15、r Fashion and Design London: Thames & Hudson.3 Collins. 1994. Collins English Dictionary , London: HarperCollins. 4 Dewey, J. 1934. Art as Experience, New York: Perigee Books.5 Flusser, V. 1983. Towards a Philosophy of Photography ,London: Reaktion.6 Hopper, A. 2010.Cambridge Ideas Change the World.
16、 DOI= http:/www.cambridgenetwork.co.uk.html7 Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action , Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.8 Merleau-Ponty, M. 1960. Eye and Mind, in Merleau-Pontys Essays on Painting, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.9 Russell, A. 2009. Alex Russell, in B. Quinn, Te
17、xtile Designers: at the Cutting Edge, London: Laurence KingAuthenticity in Digital Printing ABSTRACTFor those presently undertaking research and practice within the field of digitally printed textiles, inadequately defined boundaries can potentially lead to confusion and misunderstanding. This paper
18、 aims to clarify what is meant by the term digital print and locate authenticity within it, by drawing comparisons with photography in order to better explain some of the contextual issues that currently surround the digital printing of textiles.The scope ranges from an initial idea formed as a digi
19、tal file that is stored on a computer , to the act of depositing droplets of dye through the print heads of a digital printer as an image, which is subsequently steamed and fixed onto the fabric substrate. There are, however, many processes and techniques involved in digital printing, none of which
20、are unique to the digital printing of textiles; each individual technique, according to Cambridge Universitys Andy Hopper, can also be used to manufacture high-value, high precision products such as flat-panel displays, printed electronics, and photovoltaic cells for power generators (2010). Also, a
21、s author Sarah Braddock Clarke states, the computer is only a tool, so it is not the computer, but rather the artist or designer, who makes the aesthetic decisions (2007: 178). Nonetheless, increasingly these technologies are providing complex, rewarding and aesthetically challenging opportunities f
22、or contemporary textile artists, designers and crafts persons. 1. INTRODUCTIONThis practice-led research project asks: How can craft practices be used as interventions in the digital printing of textiles? To address this question, it is essential to clarify what constitutes the digital printing of t
23、extiles, and where boundaries exist for a print to be understood as a digital print. This is necessary so that potential interventions may be identified, targeted and justified within this area of research and practice.When Braddock Clarke highlights that the computer is merely a tool, and the creat
24、ive input comes not from the tool, but from the artist or designer, she supports the view expressed by philosopher John Dewey, that creative work and the machine are both products of the imagination; but, unlike the machine, an artifact carries on working imaginatively in the physical world. This di
25、vide, between the artifact and the machine, is increasingly being traversed within contemporary practice, in part due to the extensive opportunities afforded by technology; as textile designer Alex Russell explains, design is becoming more about aesthetic selection than crafting (2007, 2005: 285). W
26、hile tacit knowledge and creativity exist outside the computer, this extraneous state also extends to the other technologies intrinsic to the digital printing process.A digital image, before it is printed on, for example, a textile, is stored as a coded file on the computer, and this file represents
27、 a series of creative judgments by the artist or designer. However, the file is merely one step within the process of producing a digital print. While a version of this file can be depicted as a light-source image on a screen, it does no t constitute a necessary step of the process. It is merely a r
28、eferencing opportunity to revisit a nonmaterial version of the image produced at the creation of the initial file, and as screens vary, eve n this image is liable to differences in aesthetic quality. The file is subsequently digitally printed onto a substrate, and, in the case of large format inkjet
29、 printers, the resulting textile is steamed and the dyes fixed. This dye-based image displays a wide range of aesthetics that are also significantly influenced by the fabric that is used.2. THE AUTHENTICPhilosopher Walter Benjamin tells us that the original of an artifact is located within time and
30、space and it is this feature that allows its authenticity to be gauged (1936: 3). He differentiates between the process of reproduction, and the mechanics of reproduction, and claims it is the process that is repeated, not the act of designing or creating the original image. So, when we refer to a p
31、rint as a digital print , or call it an image that is digitally printed , or indeed go so far as to say it is a digital print that is digitally printed , what we may at first think we identify as an original or authentic version of that print, may not be any such thing. This paper suggests the authe
32、ntic original is located somewhere within the range of processes and technologies necessary for creating a reproducible printed image; from an initial file within the computer, to the printed image before it is steamed and fixed; somewhere prior to the final print on the textile becoming an independ
33、ent entity, one that has a very different aesthetic from the initial visual stored as a coded file on the computer before it is printed on a substrate.Not only does the substrate of a digital print influence the final aesthetic, with its hue, tactility, colour, etc., but also this textile choice wil
34、l have an impact on the future existence of the digital print. This decision dictates the functions to which, or products into which, the digitally printed textile may be formed, and this in turn will have an impact on the life expectancy of the digital print as well as the journey the printed texti
35、le will take during its lifetime. Therefore, the thought or idea of a digital print depends on many variables, factors that can be, but only to a limited extent, predetermined within the initial design process. The various elements required to produce a textile digital print do not yet act as one an
36、d, therefore, cannot be described as a black box (Latour, 1987: 130).Benjamin maintains that authenticity reflects, among other features, the ability to display or possess attributes of original physical condition, and original change in ownership, but he also writes that for a discipline such as ph
37、otography, where the negative allows reproductions to be made, it is futile to search for a definitive original photograph, as he says in this situation, no photographic prints can be authentic (1936: 4). However, this paper argues that this is not the case within the digital printing of textiles, a
38、s although there are clearly similarities between a photographs negative and the file of a digital image: for example, both represent a single vehicle for reproduction, are able to be manipulated prior to multiple printing, and allow multiple versions to be printed; but, whereas the photographs nega
39、tive is one single physical item, the digital prints counterpart comprises not one, but a whole range of material and nonmaterial components plus various processes and technologies, from the digital file to the dye being digitally dispersed by print heads onto a textile (but not including the final
40、independent substrate with the digitally dispersed dye upon it) (Benjamin, 1936: 4). It is therefore suggested that the term digital print should encompass a number of processes, to include the digital file and the digital dispersing of the digitally printed dye; but not the dye-formed image, which
41、is, like a photograph, a byproduct or post condition of the digital printing process.3. THE REALLet us reflect on photography and philosopher Vilm Flussers definition of what is real, as opposed to what is authentic. He maintains that the world, and the camera, are merely preconditions for the image
42、, and this could lead us to consider that in digital printing the computer can also be classified as a precondition, for the act of creating an initial image as a coded file, and the final dye-based version of that image can similarly both be described as preconditions (Flusser, 1983: 37). The negat
43、ive referred to by Benjamin was, he claimed, authentic, and this would imply that the preconditions are outside the authentic, in other words, the authentic acts as a boundary for what constitutes original physical condition and original change in ownership, and as these boundaries also define the r
44、eal of the photographic process, they can be said to share similar. boundaries, and for the purposes of this paper, arguably this means they can both be located within the same area of the same field. Another French philosopher, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, tells us that an image, regardless of its method
45、 of production or reproduction, is not located in the viewer, it is outside the person. It is a thought woven to make a connection between two non-touching entities, and it is the researchers belief that the digital image is only real when it becomes integrated into such a woven set of ideas about a
46、n image situated somewhere between the file and the surface of the textile. However, for this to be achieved, the boundaries of a digital print must retain links to the image-as-file and the image-as-dye, traversing the two distinct media, the nonmaterial and the material. If, as Merleau-Ponty sugge
47、sts regarding creativity across diverse media, neither of these processes possess comparable aesthetic qualities or attributes, then a system of equivalence must exist to connect them (1960: 142). Thus, for the digital print to be reproducible, this paper suggests that there needs to be a viable con
48、stant, which in this case constitutes the authentic traversing media, comprising the image as digital file plus the image digitally printed as material at the point of output.The components of the means of reproducing are: the printer, but the printer needs something to print and the digital file, b
49、ut the digital file does not exist in the printer, it is on the computer. So, the means of reproducing also requires the computer and the printer to be treated as interdependent, and therefore these two should be considered as a single entity for the purposes of digitally printed textiles.4. KEY FACTORSFour k