We live in a “remix culture”,which we can see that from music and artistic works. The term “remix” was applied to music firstly. Change the volume of some tracks or substitute new tracks for the old ounces. Then the term gradually extend more industries, today referring to any reworking of already existing cultural works. According to my understanding, remix culture is a cultural environment of combining or editing existing database, technologies, equipment, materials, culture or ideas to create something new inspiration.
However, there also have a few challenges for designers and design industries. The biggest problem is that it is seen as violating the copyright and therefor as stealing. Like filmmakers, visual artist ,photographers, architects and web designers and other professional designer and design industries. Remix works should suggests a systematic re-working of a source, which attribute copyright to the original artist.
As far as I’m concerned，Remix is still good for the design industry and modern society because these most amazing creations are basically integrated from those already various elements of existing. By connecting ideas together, creative works and innovation can be made. Namely, accepted the invitation which are from all kinds of fields.
As 3-D films increased in popularity throughout the beginning of the twenty-first century, various predictions were made concerning their likely domination of the theatrical market or their future demise. Avatar (James Cameron, 2009) was heralded for its sophisticated use of stereoscopic technology. There are some remix culture to produce new relationships between audiences and screen content. Significantly, 3-D films’ stereoscopic affect moves the haptic quality found in many 2-D moving images into a realm of hyperhaptic visuality. Avatar offers a useful example for analysis of the 3-D aesthetic, the spectatorial relations that it produces and the way in which hyperhaptic modes are constructed. Through the use of extensive depth planes and negative parallax (the pop-out effect), audiences are brought towards an immersive screen space. At the same time, knowledge of the optical illusion inherent in the 3-D images means that complex relations between audiences and images are maintained. The film’s theme of displacement, introduced by the central characters’ entry into alien avatar bodies, brings into play many issues concerning spectatorial positioning and embodied sensation yet much of the affect on offer can be applied to other stereoscopic films.
From the Interactionist/Objectivist angle, then, the humans from Earth in Avatar visiting Pandora are Objectivists, while the Na’vi are Interactionists. Given the preferential depiction of the Na’vi in the film, Cameron seems to be urging us, too, to adopt an Interactionist stance towards our biophysical environment. But to pursue this point further, one needs to consider the nature of our being in the world.
For visual affect, when we add eyeglasses (if we need them) to our bodily equipment, we improve our embodied capability of vision – the eyeglasses seem to be extensions of our eyes. Our visual capacity, and hence out interactive capability, is improved by wearing the eyeglasses. A still further extension is when a person uses any kind tool, such as a hammer or saw, to enhance his ability to manipulate things in the world. The tool in this case is not obviously part of the person, but it enhances his interactive operations in the world and so extends who he is. Still further on in this direction is the use of computers and telecommunications, which is greatly extending the reach of our interactiveness. Or consider when someone else simply provides us with some useful knowledge about the world that enhances our ability to interact in the world. All of these tools and devices extend our interactiveness and thereby change the nature or our being-in-the-world that characterizes our individual existences.