According to the traditional view of the iconic signs semantics, icons represent their objects by resembling them. Although such a view does not seem to be wrong, it is not right either. According to the most common objection, resemblance relation does not possess enough explanatory power to explain how icons represent. On the one hand, the resemblance relation does not possess the same logical properties as the representation relation. On the other, the resemblance relation is too liberal and needs something that fixes the icons’ meaning. However, it does not follow that resemblance is not necessary either. If a semantic theory of iconic signs could not explain the role of resemblance, it would be considered unsatisfactory.In my talk, I will demonstrate how to reconcile these two requirements: how to explain the role of the resemblance relation in icons without taking for granted the explanatory role of resemblance. I will show that it is fruitful to think of iconic signs in terms of measurement devices. Based on the measurement theory, I will propose a semantic model of iconic signs. Finally, I will show that the resemblance of iconic signs is necessary and unexplanatory from the measurement-theory perspective.