Images are created and represented in a variety of ways. Images can be sketched, drawn, painted, photographed and so much more. The difference among all of these representations, however, is how audiences respond. When images are more realistic, the audience cannot picture themselves as much per say, in that exact situation or see it as relatable, but the image can still jar us emotionally and cause us to be sympathetic. When images are more iconic, or represent “a person, place thing or idea” (McCloud 4), the audience relates to the character more on a personal level because they can easily picture themselves in the situation.

Our world is surrounded with different types of images, particularly iconic ones. Icons are seen in everyday advertisements, cartoons and more. With cartoons in particular, we universally identify with those images, especially if they are more simplistic. The cartoon acts as “a vacuum into which our identity and awareness are pulled… we don’t just observe the cartoon, we become it.” This explains why when children watch a cartoon, why they become so entranced with the show itself and the material; they see themselves in the character and can identify with the characters in those situations. This can particularly be seen with the masking effect (McCloud 22), where more detailed backgrounds are utilized with more simplistic characters, causing us to be able to mentally place ourselves in that situation even more. When we see cartoon and iconic images, whether children or adults, we relate and respond to them on a personal level. It causes us to think about how we would respond to whatever problem the character is dealing with, and really pulls us into the cartoon and out of the real world.

When the images are realistic, however, we are more likely to react with sympathy (depending on the image) and feel more firmly rooted in the real world. Images of catastrophes are used around the world everyday to show people the level of real devastation that occurs during these events. Mahoney describes just how his sketches were used to show the general public how badly the Irish potato famine affected communities: “the visual sketch confirmed the authenticity of famine suffering, serving as an eyewitness representation of a moment amidst the calamity” (Farrell 10). One more modern instance of using realistic images to show the calamity of an event would be with Hurricane Katrina. I have provided a sample image that shows just how catastrophic Hurricane Katrina was and how much damage it had on New Orleans. When images like these show up in newspapers, it really jars people with the seriousness of the events. These pictures show just how detrimental of an effect these catastrophes have on different communities. Because the pictures are so jarring, they cause people to sympathize with the parties pictured. However, because the images are realistic and not iconic, it does not allow audiences to personally identify with the people as much. They do not picture themselves in the situation that the image captures, but instead, the shock of the chaos shown in the image brings people back to reality. The shock causes the audience to clearly be able to see that they are in their reality, not in the image and that they cannot personally identify with the plight of the people in the image. While people feel sorrow and sympathy for the people dealing with the situation at hand, the lack of identification allows the majority of audiences to not feel a sense of responsibility or feel like they are obligated to do something. In other words, realistic images cause sympathy, but also create a sense of otherness and isolation from the image, whereas with icons and simplistic images, we relate to them on a deeply personal level.

This picture I chose shows the ash that lifted from the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii last year. In terms of composition, this photo has very distinct hues and values. The photo mostly uses hues of grey and green throughout the picture. The green colors in the photo have a very high value, as they are brighter and closer to the “near-white form.” The giant dark grey plume of ash however, has a low value, as the color is closer to black. The use of the hues and values really draw our eye to the dark clouds, making the scene ominous despite the bright green colors of the grass. The photo also uses a lower eye level, forcing you to look up to the giant clouds. This perspective suggests a sense of power, danger and doom.