The image (sign) presented is not focused on representing the real, true, false or imaginary. This image seeks to give greater prominence, if anything, to the meaning from the simulacrum. Matter-picture as object becomes, in this case, an importance that exceeds what is told (sign), as part of the object, subject it to the importance of proper sense, the simulacrum.
It’s no longer to identify the real from what is not, but to use the strategies, the mechanisms of reality to question own existence. The picture presented is not able to be true in another place like a simulacrum. As Baudrillard quoted in “Culture and Simulation” in reference to the simulacrum of divinity: “This is precisely what was feared by Iconoclasts, whose millennial quarrel is still with us today. This is precisely because they predicted this omnipotence of simulacra, the faculty simulacra have of effacing God from the conscience of man, and the destructive, annihilating truth that they allow to appear – that deep down God never existed, that only the simulacrum ever existed, even that God himself was never anything but his own simulacrum” This works refers essentially to a question of contemplation, that explores the need to identify and understand the reality. If the recognition of the simulacrum has made stagger the survival of the reality.