More than a decade has passed since criminologists lamented the primacy of linguistics over images in criminology (Hayward, 2010). Today, monographs and edited collections dedicated to visual criminology abound, and special issues of journals and international handbooks have expanded the conversation about what visual criminology is and should be. This edited collection is dedicated to the latter enterprise, in particular. Visual criminology remains a predominantly poststructuralist enterprise, inspired by semiotics, and has drawn, in particular, on the academic discipline of visual cultural studies. Here, criminologists search for the image’s meaning beyond what is formally depicted. This predominant character of visual criminology constitutes this collection’s departure point. Visual criminologists working in this fashion tend to avoid the image associated with positivist and especially quantitative criminology. The irony is that it is this kind of criminology that is, perhaps counterintuitively, so visual, in terms of both the number and the kinds of images within its purview. Under this umbrella, I am thinking of the images from biological to sociological positivism (from Lombroso to the Chicago School). It is likely that readers will be thinking,here,of images that visualize quantities (pie and bar charts, for example), those that visualize locations (cartograms and distribution maps, for example), or ones that I am particularly fond of as a neurodivergent (dyslexic and autistic) scholar that visualize connections (fowcharts and mind maps, for example).