User:Mathijs van Oosterhoudt/projectprop2: Difference between revisions

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:


== Introduction ==
== Introduction ==




Line 14: Line 15:
'''
'''


A tool is a specific application of technology, created to solve problems. Technology constantly influences how we view the world around us, and by logical consequence so does the tool, that which allows us to (in an ideal world) apply said technology directly for our own reasons, rather than indirectly influencing us (for other people's reasons). We hold the tool, we use the tool, we determine how it is used, etcetera.
However, just Like with technology, it becomes important to question who controls the creation of tools, as often the user of the tool is not the same as the creator, And if so, the creation of tools still requires tools and is influenced by his or her's view and understanding on technology (i.e. if one would make a measuring device, it would most likely be modeled after an already existing one, rather than trying to invent one's own technique of measuring.)). Small changes in tools influence us in ways unimaginable, and while problem-solving through the creation of tools might sound ideal, one also has  to understand that tools might not only be created to solve '''our''' problems, but perhaps largely '''their''' (The creators, the shapers of tools) problems.
Tools solve problems, but tools also restrain. Crudely put: By doing one thing, it might not be doing the other thing. The specifics of the tool is one of many decisions, many restraints. We pick our tools (Perhaps unconsciously) on which restraints we prefer or think we require. These restraints shape the outcome of the work we as users attempt to create with the tool, but also influences the way we perceive the tool (And through that, technology and society). However, creators (of tools) don't actively shape tools to what they want them to do '''to''' the user in mind, but rather by what they think they want them to do '''for''' the user (Langdon, Technology as Forms of Life).


Tools impose certain restraints upon us when we use them. These restraints shape the outcome of the work we attemp to create with them, but also our way of thinking, both about the tool, its result and everything around us. We don't actively shape our tools with what we want them to do '''to''' us in mind, but rather by what we think we want them to do '''for''' us.
Technology is not something that influences us solely on its own, but rather its use, both directly as well its use in context (socially and culturally) is what influences us (McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man). How a tool is shaped or created greatly influences its possible use, to the point where it becomes important that users are able to shape the tool as is required for their needs. This appropriation might seem quite commonplace with the blooming maker culture nowadays, but do realize that appropriation of technology comes with the understanding of technology. I understand a book, I understand its shape, hence my ability to use it to level out that one odd leg on my table. Appropriating more complex technology however becomes harder as it evolves with time. Where one might understand a pinhole camera (Inherently just a black box with a hole on the front), one can nowadays not easily understand the mechanics of a digital camera without in-depth studies. This prevents us from appropriation, therefor giving power to its creator - those who control the means of production.


Instead of shaping our tool based on how we think we want our tool to behave, my goal is to shape the tool based on how I want it to shape its user, whilst researching how culture and society influence the creation and shaping of tools.
A last question to ponder is that of the use of the tool versus that which it creates. The user often sees tools as a means of getting his or her result, but whilst both the result and the journey matter, to what degree is the actual usage of the tool of influence rather than its end result (or possibilities)? Where a painting from Pollock references the act of painting itself, the end goal of any tool in some way, shape or form will reference the tool (And thereby technology) itself. How does the tool relate to the now common phrase The Medium is the Message?


The way this tool will shape and influence the user is by making him / her aware of the inherent restraints and impact of our tools on our society; By employing exactly what it is that I want to talk about. The goal is not to restrain, control and limit the user with the process of the shaping, but to do the opposite: To empower them by bringing these things to light.
My goal is to create a tool which is designed with the goal of making visible the ways in which it is shaping its user.


Simultaneously it focuses on the act of using the tool, rather than the general focus on the end result. A painting from Pollock references the act of painting itself, it's not the end-goal that matters but rather the act of getting there. How can we apply these thoughts to for example the near-instantaneous result of a camera? How much is it the camera that shapes us as our tool compared to that of the photo shaping us as the end-result of the process?


Can the act of using the tool stand on its own and thereby consciously shape the user?


== Relation to previous practice ==
== Relation to previous practice ==
Line 39: Line 43:
== Thesis intention ==
== Thesis intention ==


My thesis will be a big part in creating my project. By thoroughly examining the different ways of how cameras have evolved and have been altered and how they have influenced us throughout the years, both now and how we look back at the past (Through photographs, I hope to use these techniques in creating my own project. It will delve into the social and cultural constructions that influenced the shaping of the camera to what it is today and how that in turn effects us, taking a stance against the idea of techno determinism and focusing on the mutual shaping of technology (And thereby the tool).
By thoroughly examining the different ways of how cameras have evolved and have been altered and how they have influenced us throughout the years, both now and how we look back at the past (Through photographs, I hope to use these techniques in creating my own project. It will delve into the social and cultural constructions that influenced the shaping of the camera to what it is today and how that in turn effects us, taking a stance against the idea of techno determinism and focusing on the mutual shaping of technology (And thereby the tool).
By focusing on the camera instead of the tool in general I want to create a more clear text that is still applicable to the use and creation of tools in general rather than solely the camera.
By focusing on the camera instead of the tool in general I want to create a more clear text that is still applicable to the use and creation of tools in general rather than solely the camera.



Revision as of 03:17, 5 November 2014

Camera gun.jpg

Camera Induco

Introduction

'To behold, use or perceive any extension of ourselves in technological forms is necessarily to embrace it. By continuously embracing technologies, we relate ourselves to them as servo-mechanisms.' - Marshall Mcluhan


'We become what we behold. We shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us.' - John M. Culkin

A tool is a specific application of technology, created to solve problems. Technology constantly influences how we view the world around us, and by logical consequence so does the tool, that which allows us to (in an ideal world) apply said technology directly for our own reasons, rather than indirectly influencing us (for other people's reasons). We hold the tool, we use the tool, we determine how it is used, etcetera.

However, just Like with technology, it becomes important to question who controls the creation of tools, as often the user of the tool is not the same as the creator, And if so, the creation of tools still requires tools and is influenced by his or her's view and understanding on technology (i.e. if one would make a measuring device, it would most likely be modeled after an already existing one, rather than trying to invent one's own technique of measuring.)). Small changes in tools influence us in ways unimaginable, and while problem-solving through the creation of tools might sound ideal, one also has to understand that tools might not only be created to solve our problems, but perhaps largely their (The creators, the shapers of tools) problems.

Tools solve problems, but tools also restrain. Crudely put: By doing one thing, it might not be doing the other thing. The specifics of the tool is one of many decisions, many restraints. We pick our tools (Perhaps unconsciously) on which restraints we prefer or think we require. These restraints shape the outcome of the work we as users attempt to create with the tool, but also influences the way we perceive the tool (And through that, technology and society). However, creators (of tools) don't actively shape tools to what they want them to do to the user in mind, but rather by what they think they want them to do for the user (Langdon, Technology as Forms of Life).

Technology is not something that influences us solely on its own, but rather its use, both directly as well its use in context (socially and culturally) is what influences us (McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man). How a tool is shaped or created greatly influences its possible use, to the point where it becomes important that users are able to shape the tool as is required for their needs. This appropriation might seem quite commonplace with the blooming maker culture nowadays, but do realize that appropriation of technology comes with the understanding of technology. I understand a book, I understand its shape, hence my ability to use it to level out that one odd leg on my table. Appropriating more complex technology however becomes harder as it evolves with time. Where one might understand a pinhole camera (Inherently just a black box with a hole on the front), one can nowadays not easily understand the mechanics of a digital camera without in-depth studies. This prevents us from appropriation, therefor giving power to its creator - those who control the means of production.

A last question to ponder is that of the use of the tool versus that which it creates. The user often sees tools as a means of getting his or her result, but whilst both the result and the journey matter, to what degree is the actual usage of the tool of influence rather than its end result (or possibilities)? Where a painting from Pollock references the act of painting itself, the end goal of any tool in some way, shape or form will reference the tool (And thereby technology) itself. How does the tool relate to the now common phrase The Medium is the Message?

My goal is to create a tool which is designed with the goal of making visible the ways in which it is shaping its user.


Relation to previous practice

These themes are identical to that of my essay on the button; my media object for this year. It talks about how we construct the button to what we want it to do, whilst afterwards that technology shapes us in ways we could not have imagined before, even through the most minute changes. By bringing these design choices and their effects to light we're able to use these effects to our advantage, rather than as an exploitation as is often the case (See the chapter on Obfuscation in 'The Retrospective of the Button')

At the same time it relates to the GeoCam project, a camera which instead of taking photographs, searches for relevant photographs to your location and camera orientation, allowing the recycle of existing imagery without need for new ones. It reflects on what we require from our camera and what we expect it to do, whilst questioning the need of the users requirements.

The Local Web app relates in that it makes clear how we've started to think differently as influenced by every day technology, trying to show how we've taken the wideness of the web for granted. By only being able to access websites that are stored in your local vicinity, one is confronted with the inability to access the 'world wide' part of the web. At the same time, it displays the physicality of the internet which is often obfuscated and hidden behind the magical browser. What might seem local might not be at all.


Relation to a larger context

Thesis intention

By thoroughly examining the different ways of how cameras have evolved and have been altered and how they have influenced us throughout the years, both now and how we look back at the past (Through photographs, I hope to use these techniques in creating my own project. It will delve into the social and cultural constructions that influenced the shaping of the camera to what it is today and how that in turn effects us, taking a stance against the idea of techno determinism and focusing on the mutual shaping of technology (And thereby the tool). By focusing on the camera instead of the tool in general I want to create a more clear text that is still applicable to the use and creation of tools in general rather than solely the camera.

Practical steps

Researching the history of how the evolution of the camera (And in relation other tools) has shaped us, our view of the world and the technology of the camera will allow me to use these notions as a starting point for both my project and the final thesis.

By exaggerating, changing or adapting these same techniques as have influenced us in the past, I hope to create new cameras that can bring this to light. By continuously reiterating and using the camera I hope to gain an understanding of how my own camera influences the user, building further upon it and continuously refining it or trying new cameras.

This will physically manifest itself in a single or a set of cameras, in a to be determined way of presentation, which will hopefully allow user interaction / participation to let the visitor be the operator.

References

Reference.