Camera Fun

These days I am just going berserk with the photo tools I have downloaded on my phone. The camera(s) gives me so many possibilities and great effects that it has become almost a compulsive habit to check how something that I see in real would look through a particular effect! Most of the times, the camera makes the scene automatically look interesting. As if photography happened automatically! The black and white, the sepia tones, the old effects - all are so engrossing. I keep taking pictures just for amusement of the self! Following are pictures in different sizes, borders, shapes, colours, effects and what not! I just told to myself - rather than running away from the plethora of choices available, lets indulge! It's giving me pleasure!

I have added a lot to my photo-archive. In the past two months, the amount of photos that I have clicked have almost doubled or tripled! I don't know if this is the new camera phenomenon or the need to document. I don't think it's the latter! These photographs seldom have any documentation value. The value they may be counted for is aesthetic. But I did not create the aesthetic! It's the software at work!!

So with these effects, I started strategising. I speculate what effect would suit what kind of environment and try out various possibilities of the same frame. I haven't mastered it though! Thus I have multiple versions of the same photo! I keep them and study what goes wrong in each of them. Most of the times, it is the screw up of light. Light conditions are terrible. Sometimes, it feels to capture the frame as the eye sees it, but the camera does not see exactly like that! That is when one wonders to have a professional camera! Meanwhile, here are experiments from handy software cameras:

The production of Metaphor

The fractured evolution of modernity in developed ing countries allows for the production of a language that is not as rational as the language of modernism. In other words, the rational language of modern period remains insufficient to give a description of a developing country. This new language creates metaphors which allow poetry and infuse new meanings into spaces we inhabit. In such language lies the unclarity within which people operate tactically.


idea under construction

Institutions and their Idiosyncrasies

Institutions are intimidating. I always fear them initially. They have their own rules and codes of conduct and they expect you to know them before you engage with them. I wonder if it would be different in case we knew the conceptual operation of any institution we want to interact with. Nevertheless, the lack of knowledge that you are made to feel when you enter institutions is what makes you feel miniscule. Each institute has its own language - own terms and its own grammar. They always take advantage of this language and operate within the loopholes sometimes for their advantage.

People working in any institutions have mastered their own languages and operate in idiosyncratic ways. Sometimes they surprise you, sometimes they amuse you - but most of the times, they make you angry. This anger is towards institutionalized ways in which they behave and expect you to behave.


I have been running around banks these days to get some papers arranged for my financial records. And the more they ask me to wait for simple things, the more I get irritated. So I started recording idiosyncratic behaviours of people in bank. The following is very judgmental, sarcastic and has to be read in the frame of my mind in the bank, waiting for a simple letter stating my account balance in another currency:


"Most women in banks work like housewives. The way they handle paper, the way they write on official documents and the way they interact with machines (printers, computers, scanners, etc) is absolutely like they are cooking food. Basically they mishandle everything. The last thing they would think of is a misreading that could occur due to their bad handwriting, erasure or damage that may be caused due to their improper handling or trouble that customers may land with due to non functionality of machines. But this is not only true of women, most men too behave so. I don't know if this critique comes from my institutionalized aesthetic towards paper or because of the values instilled in me during my upbringing. But one thing that I am certain of is that the above errors I pointed out are purely functional and have no aesthetic implications. Each act at the bank involves figures which relate to money. And one may not disagree that all matters relating to money have to be handled with utmost care and discretion. 


This woman poked multiple pins in the document that she was supposed to finally hand me over. Not only that, in order to poke the pin, she folded, almost pinched and crumpled the paper spoiling its entire crease. Forget the crease, the way she put the bank's rubber stamp on the paper was so hard, that the ink blurred and the stamp print appeared like an impressionist painting. No one in their lives could ever understand which bank I hold an account with. The whole purpose of getting a bank stamp, I feel is lost. Now, it just remains as a blue stain on the paper, completely disregarding its own content and all information that lay below its ink. Inspite of sufficient white space on the paper, this woman official chooses to bang the stamp on the most irrelevant space. Banging the stamp to get an impression on a document is like a ritual - it has to be accompanied by the loud sound. Somehow I think, these officially relate a 'good' print to the loud noise that is produced while the perform the act of printing. And a compulsory part in the sequence of all this conundrum is the ritualistic mess up with the prefixes 'Mr.' & 'Mrs.' with the names. Quite obediently, this person committed this mistake too.

The handwritings of bank officials are prophecies by the pen they use. It feels as if some divine intervention occurs through the ball point of the pen. The words they write are least legible and can only be understood by who wrote it. Handwriting specialists may make theories out of such coded writing. For others, they are squiggles on the paper. Although they must be considered very valuable. It matters what transcends from the ball pen to the paper through their hand. For the bankers on the other side of the table, it's almost an ordinary job done. The value of the work is only to be understood by the client, not the worker. 


In such ways, institutions hone their staff. They perhaps employ staff who are ready to take endless pressure and perhaps express all the frustration on the tools they use or work they do. The work is an artifact - a signifier of their frustrated lives. One can curate a potential art exhibition of it! I am afraid I am not an expert. But it would involve an elaborate team of specialists, psychiatrists and artists to give more profound meaning to the otherwise quotidian work that the institution employees produce.

Portfolio Planning

Architectural Drawing: An Inquiry III

Is it out of nostalgia, the love for the past or the critique of the present, I dont know. Why do we always find our pasts comfortable than the present? This post is a continuation of the dialogue on drawing as an act. And in this section, I am thinking of the tools we used to draw, versus those used today.

I am perhaps trying to document shift in a certain kind of drawing culture. The shift has caused changes, and through my own bias, I undervalue them. Shift in culture of doing things changes values we associate with them. 

(Typing has become boring and in my note book, I make very diagrammatic notes - like concrete poetry. The interface of a blog in its conventional format does not allow it. So these days, most of my posts end up becoming very fractured and without elaboration. Pardon for that - that is also a culture shift). However, I will try to explore diagrammatic writing on this interface. 

Below is a list of activity > old tool > new tool list. All activities are related to drawing:

Activity	Old tool	New Tool	Remarks
Drawing a line	Lead wooden pencils: minimum grades	Lead wooden pencils: multiple grades Clutch pencils with different points	Students use different pencils to draw different intensities of lines.
Sketching	Coal / Coke sticks	Charcoal pencils	The way in which one handled a charcoal stick changes, hence the way in which one draws changes
Erasing	Conventional cubic erasers	Pencil erasers Erasing shields	Students take lesser care in the first step of drawing
Inking	Rotring pens	Microtip rotrings Stabillo	The care taken to make edges meet is lesser. The care taken to preserve the tool is lesser.
Straight lines	Foot rule, drafter	Rolling scales, adjustable setsquares, stencils, etc	Things happen faster and the culture of cross checking dimensions is fading away.
Sharpening	Cutters / blades	Sharpeners, electronic sharpeners, etc	Sharpeners are becoming redundant with the coming of clutch pencils.

Students now carry different pencils to achieve different grades of lines. Back in our times, our professors taught us to use a single pencil to create a variety of line intensities just by correct application of pressure. Is it too late to re-instill in students this value - since the uses of using only on pencil are purely logistical - it saves the time you spend in switching tools and it saves the space the new tools would otherwise occupy. It also avoids chances if losing or buying expensive items.

Tools are always devised to overcome shortcomings. Few baseline shortcomings can be underlined as the issue of speed and the issue of facility. These ideas take larger meanings over time, than just their functional values and tools become objects to possess. 

In the remarks column, all statements point at a certain way in which value system is changing. Our ways of looking at a drawing versus the students way of looking at a drawing must be imagined through the process in which the current generation is operating. Otherwise, we may leave ourselves dissatisfied with the kind of product the students are offering us.

-----

WORKING QUESTIONS:
Do our tools control us? 
Or has the possession of these tools become a style statement?
Or are there new deficiencies of skill which have devised new tools? What does it say of our culture? Do we belong to a culture that capitalizes upon every kind of human activity - whether efficient or deficient?