Like DOT, many destination marketing or management organizations (DMOs) use photographs to represent and promote destinations and attractions. Photographs play a crucial role in promoting destinations as they set expectations of quality and experience (Garrod, 2009). Images that are portrayed and actual experience could determine tourist satisfaction and possibilities of recommending to others and returning back (Britton, 1979; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Garrod, 2009; Tuohino & Pitkänen, 2004). Choosing images to represent destinations and projecting how they will be received and perceived prove to be a difficult endeavor for researchers and DMOs alike owing to multiple social realities and even more complex feedback loops among multiple senders and receivers (Blichfeldt, 2018; Crick, 1985; Garrod, 2009; Hunter, 2008; Jenkins, 2003). In the advent of social media, actors and stakeholders are better able to communicate to and with amongst themselves, producing complex interactions than ever before that stimulate experiences, images, and even satisfaction rates (Oliveira & Panyik, 2015). Visual representations help build a destination image that has been referred to as both the actual image represented and possible metaphorical implications of the image and are subject to a wide range of interpretations by different tourism stakeholders (Beerli & Martin, 2004; Edwards, 1996). In this view, photographic representations of tourism destinations has three directions of inquiry: the extrinsic direction which looks into the difference between representation and reality, the intrinsic direction which deals with the message and the style of the image itself, and the dynamic direction which focuses on the ability of the image to influence perception, lens, and experience of a place (McGregor, 2000). As such, photographic representations of tourism destinations have “multiple signifiers for the endless purposes of various combinations of senders and receivers” that contribute to the complexity of a destination image in itself (Hunter, 2008, p. 356). These representations and interpretations can evolve through time, through a process called resemiotization. It deals with “how meaning-making shifts from context to context, from practice to practice, or from one stage of a practice to the next” (Iedema, 2003, p. 41). That is to say, representations and meanings are subject to different interpretations as it is communicated in varying contexts and through different media. The trans>