جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « perspective » در نشریات گروه « هنر و معماری »

Statement of the problem: 

After the arrival of the lithography industry in Iran (1249 AH) under the support of Abbas Mirza Naib al-Sultaneh, a huge transformation took place in the field of illustration, as many artists produced extensive works in this field. At the beginning, how the lithography method works to produce illustrated versions was not very easy for artists, but over time, the artists, by gaining various experiences in this field, succeeded in producing noteworthy images, among them, Seyyed al-Shaara is one of the unknown artists. In the field of illustrations of stone printing books, only one of his works entitled Bahr al-Fawaed (Mathematical Principles) (published: 1324 AH) remains. There is not much information about this artist's life and artistic profile, but his illustrations indicate his mastery of design and composition skills. One of the issues that distinguishes the works of these artists from other available lithography works is the high quality of the images and masterful performance of this artist, because during his artistic career, most of the lithography works had declined in terms of quality and The images are simpler and more primitive compared to the beginning of the activity of the lithographic illustrators. For this reason, it is very important to examine and study the works left by this prolific but unknown artist.The aim of the research is to investigate the way of emergence and perspective features in the illustrations of Bahr al-Fawaed book by Seyyed al-Shaara.

In the current research, 16 narrative images of Bahr al-Fayed have been analyzed in a descriptive-analytical way.

According to the case study of Seyyed al-Shaara's illustrations in the book Bahr al-Fawaed, it can be found that this artist did not completely follow the deep-viewing methods of Iranian art and western linear methods, but in each picture, depending on the conditions and purpose, he used a self-made method to create depth. adopted in the image. Most likely, one of the possible reasons was the limitations of the stone printing technique. For example, in lithography, due to the removal of color and reliance on line, the artist is deprived of the possibility of creating a distinction and a point of attention with the help of color or strong light and shadows. As a result, it is possible that Seyyed al-Shaara has made exceptions in the perspective type of images due to the limitation of visual elements. In some cases, according to the common custom of Iranian art, when important people are drawn with magnification (spatial perspective), Seyyed al-Shaara has also used this method to draw war commanders in most cases. Of course, in the case of this artist's pictures, the purpose of the official perspective is not only to respect the status of individuals, and this method has also played the role of creating balance in the crowded compositions of Seyyed al-Shaara's works. However, in a special case like picture 14, despite the presence of Napoleon, who is a prominent figure, he has been depicted with very small proportions. There is a possibility that Napoleon in this image as a person who will fail, did not need magnification and official perspective. In some of the images, the people and equipment that were present in the distance are depicted with brief lines without details, which is reminiscent of the atmospheric perspective method. has not had, it should be noted that the limitation in the implementation of design details in much smaller scales than the common sizes in lithography could have been the reason for this problem in more distant parts. In some images such as image 6, it seems that the artist has not made a conscious and deliberate effort to create and design the principles and organization in depth, and has changed the sizes and distance and proximity of the elements with the sole purpose of filling the image and showing different events of the battle. In general, it can be said that Seyyed al-Shaara in Bahr al-Fawaed's illustrations shows a combination of Iranian and Western depth-viewing methods, although not in a purposeful way, but simply to create enough space for the characters and to achieve a balanced composition, the elements are drawn small or large. has done.

Brandt (2021) ignores Peircean indices as signs and fits them into the category of symbolic signs if they are intentional. He names the third group of signs as diagrams and considers them, along with iconic and symbolic signs, to complete semiotic aspects of the art of life. In this research, we intend to illustrate that Persiancalligraphy has characteristics similar to diagrammatic signs and can be fitted into the category of diagrams. For this purpose, by using the structural perceptions of Persian calligraphy, Gestalt rules and semiotic blending, we analyse perceptually and conceptually a known work of Persian calligraphy art. To discover perceptual meanings, we apply Gestalt rules in the spaces of this work. The meaning obtained from this type of ‘ception’ is not person-dependent and culture-dependent. Perception of a sign occurs due to the stimulation of Gestalt principles in our mind. For example, if two points are in the scope of our vision, our mind creates a line by stimulating the principle of ‘similarity’. This line, in fact, is invisible, but it can be perceived. In order for extracting the conceptional mening, we apply Brandt's blending theory to this work and name the resulting meaning as conceptual meaning. This meaning depends on how to perceive, which itself is dependent on perceptual perspective, and in addition, on our mental schemas. These two factors make conceptual perspective. Special attention has been paid to the perspective within the perceptual and conceptual analyses, because the way and order of observation as well as our schemas can change our interpretaion. It means that with a different perspective, a different interpretation is obtained. In order to conceive a sign, it is necessary to perceive it, because we first perceive the world with our senses. Then, with the formation of mental spaces and the presence of mental schemas, the ‘meaning space’ is created in our mind. This kind of approach to conceptualization was founded by Fauconnier and Turner in 1997 under the name of blending theory. Brandt, while criticizing the theory of mental spaces proposed by Fauconnier and Turner, presents a supplementary model of the semiotic blending, which includes five mental spaces as well as mental schemas as a conceptualisation interface. According to the model used for the conceptual analysis of this Persian calligraphy work, conceptual meaning is the result of our perception lead to a blending space and our schemas. The analysis of the considered calligraphy work from the perceptual and concetual points of view, focusing on the imagination factors such as selection, perspective, prominence, dynamicity, syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations, clearly illustrated that this calligraphy work can be considered as a diagrammatic sign in nature; because the organization of calligraphy forms based on these cognitive contents has been done in such a way that guarantees the conception of the work. It is assumed that perceptual and conceptual meanings, in addition to the space of Persian calligraphy, can also be obtained in the space of other human arts, based on what was tested in this research.

Following figures, buildings are the second most efficacious visual element in Persian painting. Even in the oldest paintings in which landscape was not expressive of the space, there used to be a building to organize the space in three dimensions. In the historical path of Persian painting, buildings had this role in all periods because Iranian artists used to illustrate stories in some of which a building, such as a royal palace, garden, fortress, castle, an alcove, or aula was a location of the fictional events.
In Persian painting, buildings are not only locations in which the stories take place, but they also narrate the unwritten parts of stories or as Stephen G. Nicholas (1989) argues, they uncover “textual unconscious”. Having some features such as being crowded or vacant, having one or multi floors, and simple or complicated plans, buildings can inspire viewers with different perceptions of spatial structure, some of which do not proceed with the written texts.
Based on the three-dimensional Cartesian coordination system, representation of buildings can expand the picture space along the three dimensions. It increases the height by depicting multiple floors. It opens the field of view through arrangement of the rooms and halls side by side, and enlarges the width of the scene, as well. In addition, it develops depth of the scene by placing the represented figures inside and outside the buildings. By doing so, several picture planes are formed in the scene; so a viewer understands the depth clearly.
While representation of buildings provides many visual facilities for painters, it also troubles them in case of displaying the 3rd dimension on the sheet. Since a building is a hollow and polyhedron geometric volume (especially cubes or cuboids), and since it needed to be displayed on the two-dimensional paper, painters were in need of applying some methods to create visual errors for the viewers, so that they could perceive the third dimension. Persian painters used to untangle the troubles of these methods since the medieval era.
This research, based on the idea about buildings’ roles and visual facilities, probes the functions and consequences of representations of buildings in Persian paintings, and shows how Iranian painters used to fabricate the illusive 3rd dimension to place the visual elements on three axes: height, width, and depth. Although some scholiasts believe that Persian painting is a two-dimensional art and Persian painters used to avoid displaying perspective deliberately, scrutiny of master artworks reveal Persian painters’ endeavor to display picture space, especially the 3rd dimension. As it were, same as we know about efficiency of three-dimensional representations based on the coordination system, Persian painters were experienced in efficiency of the buildings’ representation to expand the three-dimensional space. Clearly, it does not mean that Persian artists used to adopt Cartesian coordination system to organize the picture space. However, it can be argued that they could understand it either intuitively or based on their contemporary scientific achievements.
As it has been mentioned before, Persian painters, similar to the renaissance guild mates, used various methods to display the picture space; these methods were not the same as those used by the renaissance artists. This difference should not cause modern viewers to assume that Persian painting was two-dimensional art. Persian painters never established the vanishing point. Therefore, the modern viewers fail to perceive a three-dimensional space in Persian painting. As a result of this many questions emerged, some of which arise from the fact that modern art researchers have neglected to compile the history of Persian painting’s evolutions of methods and techniques, especially about picture space. The present research tries to address some of these questions that are listed below.

When did the first attempts of displaying the picture space take place in Persian Painting and which manuscripts contain them?
What were the roles of different Persian painting schools in legislating, changing, and confirming the rule of representation of the picture space?
What were the main challenges in establishing the methods of displaying the three-dimensional space?
What visual facilities were produced as a result of the establishment of these methods?

To shed light on Persian painting’s rules and styles in representing the picture space and to answer these questions, I analyzed around 100 illustrated Persian manuscripts, created between 12th to 16th centuries and selected more than 400 paintings each including a building (e.g., a castle, palace, mosque, etc.). To analyze the picture space in these paintings, I focused on the expansion of the space along height, width, and depth, based on which I answered the research questions. The results of this research are as follows:
The Expansion of Height: Displaying multistorey buildings is one of the most reputed methods to expand the height. Persian painters used to draw a two/three-storey building for this purpose and sometimes break the picture frame to continue the picture, especially since Ilkhanid era onwards. By doing so, the view could be stretched to the top of the paper, and beyond the frame.

In addition to the expansion of height, multistorey buildings had other functions in Persian painting. Two of the most frequent functions are inspiring symbolic concepts and presenting inverted height. In some paintings, dating back to the 15th century, several angels can be seen on roof-tops and other creatures arranged on the lower floors. Based on the verses surrounding these painting, viewers could recognize this arrangement as a symbolic representation of the chain of beings. Similarly, some multistorey buildings in the 15th-16th century paintings do not represent height. Buildings in these paintings which have been drawn based on the plans of the old hammams (bath houses), were arranged vertically in a way that the top floor (i.e., an apodyterium) represented the proceeding room and the entrance to the building. In this type of arrangement, drawing one room (i.e., a tepidarium) under the other does not represent a basement, but a sequential order. Therefore, in these paintings two-storey buildings do not show a real height.

The Expansion of Width: Since pre-Mongol period, to give viewers a sense of width, Persian painters used to display several rooms side by side. Other innovative methods were added/created during the following eras. One of the most creative methods was placing a building at the far right/left side of the picture frame, as if the picture frame was interrupting the continuation of the sight and preventing the viewer from seeing the rest of the building. This way, the width of scene could be recognized wider than what the painter actually had drawn on the sheet.
The Expansion of the Depth: Persian artists used to display the depth of scene based of two principles in painting that are as follows:Arranging Picture Planes: The oldest illustrated manuscripts reveal that their painters knew organizing picture planes and adjusting the distance between them will display the depth clearly. Having multiple sides (i.e., outside/inside and back/front), buildings provided great opportunities for the creation of depth. By placing some figures behind a window, through which those people looked at the main scene, Persian artists could communicate a sense of depth to their viewers.
Representation of a Building's Volume: Persian artists, especially since Ilkhanid period, started the first efforts to draw a three-dimensional building. Between the 13th and 16th centuries, Persian painters gradually overcame difficulties in displaying buildings’ volumes. The most important achievements and methods in this path are as follows:

Lateral, vertical or climbing staggering;
Multidirectional walls;
Interior space of buildings;
Hexagonal and octagonal plans;
Trapezoidal façades inside the buildings;
Separated interior space created by non-load bearing walls;
A combination of all methods.

Over thousands of years and depending on different traditions, values, and even geographical environments in different parts of the earth, people have been raised who have different beliefs about their existence. Different understandings of human position have led to the emergence of different cultures. Iran and Greece were the origin of civilization. The culture of these two countries has important differences and therefore they have created different arts. For example, the artworks of ancient Greece, due to the humanism and rationalism of this European culture, usually tend towards naturalism. while the artworks of ancient Iran, due to the different views of this Middle Eastern culture towards humans and the world, are often abstract. From around the 5th century, a breaking in European culture, the Middle Ages began. In the Middle Ages, because of the dominance of Christianity, Europe moved away from humanistic culture. After these developments in European culture, art moved away from Greek naturalism and moved closer to Middle Eastern abstractionism. One of the most important signs of medieval painting in Europe is lacking perspective, like Middle Eastern paintings. From around the 15th century, it became necessary to change the painting methods. Because after the Renaissance, all aspects of life gradually changed, and painting could not remain unchanged. The Renaissance, which was the result of the return to humanism and the values of ancient Greece and Rome, also needed its own paintings; paintings that are in harmony with the values of humanism, including naturalism and rationalism. In other words, humanism, which was the ruling spirit of the Renaissance, turned perspective into a problem for the painters of that period. Finally, a group of geniuses solved that by using scientific rules. Due to the stability of the fundamental values of Iranian culture, classical Iranian painting has had almost constant characteristics from ancient times to the Islamic period. One of the distinctive characteristics of Iranian painting is the lack of perspective. Iran’s culture, both in ancient times and in the Islamic period, has had different values and may even conflict with humanism. Therefore, the use of the perspective technique, which seems to be a reflection of humanism in painting, cannot be justified in Iranian painting. In the end, regarding the use of perspective in new Iranian painting (The works of artists such as Hossein Behzad), it is necessary to remember that although it is unreasonable to expect the technique and form of Iranian painting to remain unchanged throughout history, the use of perspective in this art is not justified. As explained before, perspective is a reflection of humanist values in painting, and these values - good or bad - do not have a presence among the basic values of Iran’s mostly traditional culture. The inconsistency of the use of perspective with new Iranian paintings becomes more apparent when we pay attention to the subject of these paintings, mainly taken from ancient Iranian literature and epics. Ancient Iranian literature and epics generally guide people to follow traditions and make them afraid of the consequences of breaking traditions.

The humanism of Renaissance art is generally considered the most important difference between it and Christian art of the middle centuries. Due to the fact that in the Renaissance era, a precise philosophy was not formed regarding the definition of man and his place in existence, the theoretical foundations of the emergence of Renaissance humanistic art are subject to many questions. By looking at the opinions of medieval theologians and studying its continuation in the Renaissance period, it is possible to recognize some roots of the formation of the mentioned art. Saint Augustine, in the doctrine of "I believe in order to understand", on the one hand considered religious faith as the source of rational knowledge, and on the other hand, in the depth of meaning, he considered the truth of perception and knowledge dependent on human action.Abelard's theory of doubt as a means to reach the truth, Saint Francis's explanations regarding the fact that the truth is below and inside man rather than above, as well as the belief in the originality of the individual, which was proposed by Ockham, as the theological foundations of the Middle Ages in Along with the scientific achievements of the Renaissance, they were effective in the formation of the humanistic philosophy of that period.After studying and recovering the effects of medieval philosophy on the renaissance period, this article tries to follow the similarity of the mentioned philosophical developments in the world of art. The research method in this article is descriptive and analytical, information collection is done in a library style and data analysis is done in an inductive way. According to the findings of the research, it is clear that the ruling opinions of Christian theologians were effective in the formation of modern thought and, accordingly, the humanistic art of the Renaissance. In the emergence of perspective rules as artistic Subjectivism and also in the representation of God-like man, this effectiveness can be clearly recognized. Although Renaissance painting emphasized natural beauty and physical forms, it did not lose the religious meaning of the past. The simple figures of the past gave way to a kind of luxurious beauty, self-presenting faces with precious clothes, which were obviously full of worldly power and lust. Even the image of the God of Christianity was depicted in the form of a strong and beautiful human. The human-like and powerful God had a sign of belief in God's existential dominion over human rationality. On the other hand, the discovery of new rules of perspective in Renaissance artworks was an attempt to create a rational methodical knowledge of the outside world. Although this vision is apparently at the opposite point of the pictorial tradition of the Middle Ages; However, due to the fact that the principles of philosophy based on the originality of the subject were not explained in this period, it is possible to look for the roots of some of the achievements of the Renaissance era in the past. Where Abelard, by emphasizing the place of doubt as a means of receiving truth, gave theological perception a human and indeterminate nature, or Ockham, who considered science to be the product of human experience and observation, all of them are in the malleability of the idea of representing the world based on indeterminate rules and human sensibility. And finally, the establishment of deepening laws were effective.

During the Qajar period, one of the brilliant artists was Mahmoud Khan, the king of poets, who was one of the prominent masters in painting urban landscapes. His works have different backgrounds considering his time and he is known as one of the pioneers of modern painting in Iran. Mindfulness, lighting, viewing angle, geometric connection between levels are the prominent features of his paintings. The purpose of this article is conducting an analytical study of the effect of photography on the landscapes by Mahmoud Khan Malek al-Sho'ra. The general questions in this article are as follows: 1- What are the visual features of landscapes in the works of Mahmoud Khan Malek al-Sho'ra? 2- Were the works of Mahmoud Khan Malek al-Sho'ra influenced by photography? In which sections are these influences evident? 3- The influence of Western and Iranian painting can be seen in which parts and visual elements of Mahmoud Khan Malek al-Sho'ra's works? The content of the present study is qualitative and the method of collecting information is library-based, and analyzing the landscape works of Mahmoud Khan. This research has been done by descriptive-analytical method. The importance of urban landscapes in the works of Mahmoud Khan during the Qajar period is due to the fact that he shows the new Tehran and new buildings in Tehran during the Qajar period, and his works document the buildings and landscapes of Tehran in this period. The results of this study show that Mahmoud Khan is one of the leading artists in the field of modern painting in Qajar era Iran. He shows a different type of landscape painting in the Qajar period with the influence of photography in his paintings. The important point in Mahmoud Khan's architectural paintings is the absence of human beings, kings and courtiers, and only dealing with buildings and landscapes. These paintings show the location of buildings and structures, their composition and the combination of Iranian and European art. In the backgrounds of Mahmoud Khan's works, the paintings and drawings of the earlier Qajar period can be seen in fine and segregated geometric surfaces. Mahmoud Khan's paintings of buildings show his scientific and mathematical mind as well as his knowledge of geometry and perspective. In the second half of the Qajar period, he is the point of balance between Iranian and European art. His inquisitive mind is reflected in his precise naturalization, which is evident in the provided pictures, as well as in his European view in paintings and perspective, seen from above, and punctuation. In his paintings, high skill in perspective, in-depth and accurate representation and high quality, soft and bright light, clear and correct perspective can be seen by the audience. He paints the Qajar era Tehran, which is moving towards modernization. Mahmoud Khan was aware of the principles and rules of landscape painting, form and use, one-point and two-point perspective, and he used them masterfully in his works. His knowledge of mathematics, model making of buildings, has certainly played an important role in the artist's precise artistic vision and its reflection in painting. His paintings have a photographic style and a different vision, creative mind, diversity and modernity in painting, and poetic naturalization which show his eye-catching and poetic choice of bright colors. His landscape paintings have the power of innovation, elegance, skill, and boldness in painting, that consciously use the style of realism and the combination of Iranian and European art as well as the evolution of aesthetics. He makes a difference in Qajar painting, which shows his artistic genius and philosophical vision. Iranian spirit, perspective and the effects of Westernism, and the influence of Iranian painting can be seen in his paintings and works of other painters in this period of gardens and the palaces that depicted royalty like the work of Yahya Ghaffari, son of Sani al-Mulk and Abu Turab Ghaffari, but none of them had the power and skill of Mahmud Khan, and none of them worked with watercolor technique so brilliantly and beautifully with such a great process. Most of their works were designed and produced in lithography, so the colorful nature of Mahmud Khan's watercolor works and his knowledge of color set him apart from the others. It distinguishes him from his generation. The most important part of his artistic activity is magical lighting, subtle and rich processes and spots, and original and brilliant painting. At a time when artists were mostly courtiers and worked in sculpture and portraiture, he turned to inanimate nature, landscape painting and design of the interior and exterior of buildings, and chose a theme as the main subject of his painting. While other artists had been the fringes of their craft, he achieved a personal and different style in the art of watercolor painting that is not seen in the paintings of other artists. His works, while being influenced by Iranian art, have a different feature, and that is generalization versus partiality in Iranian art.

The utilization of perspective rules in Iranian paintings (Miniatures) follows a different path in comparison with the common application of the method in western painting, designed in the renaissance period. In Iranian paintings, people’s height does not lessen when they are placed farther in the scenery. How large or small the figures appear, does not depend on the place they occupy in the scene, rather their size represents their divine, political or social status. To prevent any obstacles on the way of communicating this message, the farther figures are painted in the same size as the closer ones, but higher. Art historians explained this unique technique: “Whatever is farther is higher” and named it “vertical perspective”. Although this expression is used for decades to explain perspective in Iranian paintings, it seems that such reasoning is not adequate for justifying the various sorts of presented perspectives and their hidden significations, because it is not acceptable to imagine this hundreds of years old art in service of visualizing the literary narratives of literature, employing one of the most crucial elements in representing the sceneries, in such a primitive way. The research questions of this paper have been formed based upon the same doubts: What is the basis of formation of perspective in Iranian paintings? Is it possible to use this base to understand the perspective of these paintings the same way as the people contemporary to the art works used to understand it? Old optics- like Al-manazir, written byIbn Al-Haytham – makes it possible to see this concept and methods of presenting it from the old Iranians’ view-point. Using the findings of optics presented in Al-Manazir , one can realize that old Iranians believed understanding the depth of the scenery was impossible for the mind, unless it perceived some smaller concepts such as shapes, separations or continuity, distance, magnitude of distance and position of the objects. Six unique methods of representing perspective in Iranian paintings have been discovered, on the basis of the mentioned ideas which are different from one another in terms of the depth they present in scenery, functions and significations they communicate: implication of perspective 1- in a crowd (in audience with king, large numbers of people in armies); 2- in a little number of people (the royal private banquets in honour of foreign ambassadors, or friendly gatherings); 3-in limited or close-up scenes; 4- in vast or long-shot scenes; 5- with ordered and connected body (putting the figures behind and in front of natural separators such as mountains, rocks, trees, etc.); and 6-via buildings (paintings in which architectural buildings provide the viewer with an illusion of depth). The present research tries to bring understanding of modern audience closer to the one of viewers who lived centuries ago and reread these art works with their own contemporary mental-point. It is a historical research in which Almanazir’s fundaments is explained and perspective is analyzed and explained. It simultaneously explains the artistic and scientific frameworks, too.

From the mid-Safavid era and with the rise of commercial and cultural exchanges between Iran and West, a major transition in mode of displaying "space" in Persian Ppainting had appeared. Therefore, Persian painters in various methods applied the "Linear Perspective" in Persian painting at that time. The historical origins of this technique stemmed from the European Renaissance. Some theorists have considered economic context as the reason for scientific and cultural Revolution of Renaissance. In this respect, the appearance of this technique in painting is also dependent on the initial stages of development of the capitalistic mode of production. The purpose of this paper is to study the application of this technique in the late Safavid painting in relation to the economic context of that period. The findings of this study show that linear perspective have been applied incompletely and regionally in late Safavid paintings and Iranian painters did not conduct a serious determination for accurate and comprehensive application of this technique in their works. Simultaneously, in the economical context, following the centralization of power by Safavid (especially from the reign of Shah Abbas) and the monopolizing of the "economy", the conditions for the emergence of free class of laborers and independent merchants as requirements of production relations of capitalism were not provided. Hence, the materialistic culture based on this method of production was not developed. Despite the familiarity and the needs of Safavids to the technological goods of Modern West, at that time, "the mode of production" of these goods couldn’t progress in economy of Iran. It shows that the application of linear perspective technique in Persian painting is structurally analogous to the mode of entering and use of these technological goods. Similarly, perspective in Persian painting couldn’t be customized. If perspective in Renaissance painting is a symbol of the capitalism economy at certain stages of its growth, this technique in Persian painting is only a "representation" of that symbol; a symbol that will not refer to its economic context.

Perspective is not necessarily a representive instrument of drawing, but it is emerged our comprehensive and cognitive-linguistic framework. In fact perspective creation in art is interweaved with our linguistic view toward our surrounding environment. Perspective is a schema to transform the concepts and make metaphors as the linguistic aspect because it metaphorically demonstrates our prediction and conception towards the time and the reference frames toward place, whenever our frames of reference would be changed in language, our perspectives would be changed in art.
Three linguistics reference frames (absolute, relative and intrinsic) have been used and matched with three human positions toward horizon line (below, same level and upper horizon line) to create a model. This model expanded to review philosophy and architecture in three periods (Tradition, Renaissance and Information age)
Emphasizing on the subject or subjectivism could turn the modern epistemology in philosophy in renaissance period. This movement which determined the configuration of knowledge in an exact place and prediction of events in an exact time, recreated perspective in painting and architecture. As this movement is wholly organized on human point of view, it is called relative perspective.
In tradition era, which ontological and holistic cognition govern on thought, perception of space and ordering of events have achieved not only by human point of view but also by their inherent placement. In Iranian perspective, architect or painter do not see objects in human view. Instead, imagine him or herself in infinite position or everywhere and each scene or event is placed simultaneously beside each other based of its inherent value therefore when objects go father they become wider, contrary to western perspective in painting and architecture which objects become smaller when they go farther. Because of this comprehensive point of view, this perspective is called intrinsic perspective.
Human mind has sunk in simultaneous information in the electronic revolution and its affected virtualization, which simultaneity is replaced with the sequentiality, smoothness and two dimensional spaces are replaced with three dimensional spaces. In this age, we have multi surfaces of consciousness and multi perspectives that occur simultaneously. As we have multi layers of consciousness based of multi point of view of different observers, our perspective is nonlinear relative perspective.
An analogy between imaginative and paradoxical spaces have been done in Iranian miniature and cyber space in network world based on our cognitive linguistic achievements. In order to illustrate our analogy, the perspective of two different case studies have been compared: Auditorium of Seattle library (Designed by Rem Koolhaas) and central pavilion of Kashan Fin Garden.
At the end, the comparative table and analogical model achieved that help to explain the structure of the perspective for Iran contemporary architecture in the virtual era. As a conclusion, there is a double pattern, intrinsic-relative perspective, in which interface with two different scales: On the one hand, hyper realization when someone zoom on objects and on the other hand, simultaneous imagination when someone go far of the events.

In many cases, the invented perspective of Renaissance and its related texts from the era could be read as a claim on representing reality. Yet, they can also be considered as a unitying system in the realm of the image which is more in favor with subjective characteristics. According to the available evidences, it seems that the Renaissance perspective is not only a reflection of objective reality, but also it is incompatible with human vision. If one considers Renaissance perspective a subjective system as Kant and Panofsky did, then perspective would be a showing of the unquestioning supremacy of the subject in the realm of the image. Hence, the claim of the realism of Cubist painters would be in favor with a kind of objectivity, which criticizes the domination of the subject. The most important proof in this regard is deletion of the subject’s perspective from Cubism painting.

In order to remain dynamic and to make oneself distinguished, an artist may take different approaches; approaches which may, in turn, create new styles in art. If such an approach can be named going beyond oneself, then many artists may be nominated to have practiced it making novel styles. Going beyond oneself often follows two distinct ways: being inspired by other artists or adopting an anti-style action by the artist. Interestingly enough, it sometimes happens that certain artists, irrespective of their nationality or of their way of thinking, have become very close to each other in terms of artistic outlook and taste. Accordingly, a considerable amount of similarity can be seen among their works. Being inspired by one another has led to creation of novel artistic styles. Two of such artists are Kamalodin Behzad and David Hockney. Both went beyond themselves and beyond the common painting styles; the former by challenging his own style and the latter by being inspired by the oriental painting style. This research aimed to study certain works of Kamalodin Behzad and David Hockney comparatively in order to analyze and evaluate the similarities among their works and, hence, to examine the process of going beyond oneself by the artist. The data were mainly collected from library sources.  The result of the study indicated that in the course of going beyond oneself, the styles are incorporated. It is, in fact, the very incorporation, in terms of form and content, that gives birth to new movements in art as well as to novel artistic styles.

Presented to the world in French Academy of Science on 1839, photography foundations were laid centuries ago. As documents suggest, the invention of photography was not the outcome of creativity and efforts of an individual or a group of people, but the result of a need by the people living in a specific geographical territory, sharing the same concerns. In fact, the foundations of photography were laid in the 15th century and during the Renaissance. Man in that era tried to put himself in the place of a god-like observer (to see through an omniscient point of view) meanwhile using mathematical and geometrical rules to achieve the objective look. The quests culminated in the dark room (camera obscura) as a response to that demand, leading to fundamental changes in western visual culture. With the photographic image being formed in the dark room, the idea of camera did not seem too far; just one more step needed to be taken for the birth of photography. Painting and drawing- in absence of photography- took the opportunity to secure their place as forms of representation, leading to a competition in early years after the invention of photography. Photography, an amalgam of artistic and scientific expressions, was rooted in the visual tradition of the dark room. Photography became a means of documentation to diverse scientific and research intentions, and challenged painting as a new form of art. A demand by the new-born and developing middle-class for identification and capturing its own image on one hand, and the commercialization of photography in the age of industrial revolution and capitalist economy on the other hand, contributed to the growth and expansion of photography. In fact, a period between 15th to 20th centuries, named modernity, was an era in which fundamental changes in human intellectual basis took place, leading to deep evolutions in social structures. Photography was seeded during this era with increasing numbers of people demanding and yearning for such a medium. Mankind sought to mechanize the image formation and photography as mechanical process of image formation was the proper answer. Photography was born and flourished quickly in a society that longed for it. Photography was everywhere and was received warmly wherever it reached. The 19th-century man thought of photography as a way of conquering the world. Photography was invented to democratize and publicize the image; photography was meant to make the nature reproduce itself and thus fulfill the scientific ideal of positivism; photography aimed to challenge all forms of art. Being everywhere, photography turned to be one of the most profitable businesses of the century. In fact, photography blossomed in the ground of modernism and fruited in a century that brought fundamental changes to social, economic and cultural structures of western societies. Tracing these changes and evolutions and their causes help us in investigating the context in which photography began to develop and flourish.

The term “simultaneity” means the exhibition of various spaces without time and place sequences in an image using the principle of synchronicity. The term “spatial simultaneity” has been used for referring to Persian painting and Cubist paintings of Picasso. For this reason, the main objective in present paper is to identify similar and different aspects of the two aesthetic systems of Persian painting and Picasso painting each of which displays spatial simultaneity in its visual structure. Moreover, it is tried to show that “spatial simultaneity” lacks enough precision for describing Persian painting. Accordingly, similar and different aspects of the concept and visual structure of “spatial simultaneity” in Persian and Picasso paintings are explored. To fulfill the objectives of this paper, library sources and descriptive-analytical method are used to explore the concept of space and the manner of showing perspective in these two visual systems. The results of observations in this paper show that spatial simultaneity in aesthetic system of Persian painting and Picasso painting involves similarities and differences. For instance, in Persian painting, space is devoid of material constraints and it is in relation to the World of Ideas, whereas, in Picasso painting, space is perceptual and dependent on the material world. For this reason, it can be concluded that the term “spatial simultaneity” is not sufficiently precise to define visual structure of Persian painting because such term has been used for the first time to define Cubism style in painting which is not in complete correspondence with Persian painting.