Face, a term from Goffman's interactional sociology, seems to be what communication scholars would consider a strongly interpersonal phenomenon, grounded in interactional moments of presence with others. One can lose face without being subject to accusations of wrongdoing. Image, too, seems different. Though others indeed hold an image of you, it is still more an investment of the individual ego, in a way that face is not. Nor does image seem equal or equivalent to reputation.
Image suggests a malleable production, a self-serving projection.
Your reputation might well be at stake, and operate discursively, long after you, your face, and your image are gone. Perhaps I'm on shaky ground with these distinctions. Perhaps they'll invite rejoinder and argument. I hope at some point I'll be tuning into volume two to find out more. Prof. Benoit's theory itself is a model of brevity.