I’m Catherine Chang, technically Canadian, ethnically half Taiwanese, half Vietnamese. I spent(spend) half of my life living in Canada and the other half living in Asia. I aspire to become a true global citizen. I’m currently still exploring what exactly a “global citizen” mean. I suppose I’m the kind of “artist” (if I do call myself one) who doesn’t know how to draw, doesn’t know how to paint. Photography is my main choice of medium when it comes to creating things.
When it comes to taking photos, I’ve realized that it is easy to take beautiful photos—photos with artistic value, but it is difficult to have meaning in them. I’m currently exploring and learning how to make photos mean something, how to communicate better with photography, and how to make people see what I wish to show them.
When it comes to images, I mainly focus on images that are still. This course is going to be a great opportunity for me to expand my understanding of what is an image. And to explore images that aren’t so still. When we talk about images, does it include video? A video is just a group of still images after all.
Being a life long learner has always been one of my goals in this lifetime since high school. However, I’ve discovered that it is easy to become passive in life at times. It’s difficult to take a grasp on life and actively make meaning/sense out of it sometimes we just let things happen to us. I’m excited to keep myself active and develop the ability to understand whatever reality means to me.
My chosen image for this assignment is a photo I took in Romania during the summer of 2017. It is a one point perspective photo depicting the inside of a garment factory. The factory workers are lined up at the centre of the photo and disappearing into the vanishing point. The lights hanging from the ceiling of the factory act as leading lines for the photos. The environment in the is not particularly organized—unfinished products are scattered on the counters next to the workers, the workers aren’t wearing uniforms, lighting fixtures and electrical cords are not organized.
I took this photo when I was tagging along on a business trip in Europe. We were visiting garment factories in Romania––looking for potential investments. It was my first time in Romania, and our Italian business partner offhandedly joked about how “Romania is just like Cambodia but white!” It was funny, we all laughed although the statement was somewhat racist(?)
There’s personal significance in this photo because it was my first experience of getting to know the insides of the fashion industry. Technically people aren’t allowed to document these places but I was on this “business trip,” therefore I had the chance to play around with my camera and take some interesting photos for documentary purposes. During this trip, I learned about some scams in fashion and how the words “Made in Italy” is mostly a joke for some brands. Nowadays, everything is “Made in China,” things that are made in Europe has always been perceived as something that’s more valuable. What the public doesn’t know about some brands unnamed is that they are actually producing in other parts of Europe, and export the products to Italy to put on the “Made in Italy” tags.
This trip was a more in-depth learning experience for me. It showed me how ridiculously over-priced things are, and how capitalism is deeply embedded in our society. During the first week of class, prof briefly mentioned automation. I personally think the fashion industry challenges the idea of automation. Are the luxury handmade products ever going to be made by robots? Perhaps not in the next ten years but some time later.
We are exposed to so many photographic images on a daily basis. Text is not the only way to communicate in the modern day society. People are able to communicate with images only. After reading the article, it gave me a more concrete understanding of the photographic realm. Below are some of my favourite quotes from the article:
“transforming photographic practice into something heterogeneous, performative, seamless and infinite.”
“Instead of assuming that photography is a mechanism that transforms reality into images, we can invert the terms and see the photographer as a translator, as a facilitator of narratives.”
“The image-making process is always and necessarily the ‘making of meaning’. The process continually melds past, present and future, cognition and emotion.”
“Inscribing oneself into the image and image-making process is the only way left to participate in life: moving into the core of the image, into the work and the discourse that lies behind the image and becoming part of it, as well as of the medium. Expanded photography is, thus, about experiential truth.”
It seems like it circles back to the validity of meaning in images. It’s so easy to produce images nowadays, but how much value is in your images? Or does it matter? Do people create images just to express their own feelings? Does the image maker think of the images that they are creating when they are making images? Or is it just emotions, atmosphere, expression all bundled up and compacted into an image?
With the emerging technology, the creation of different software…making images has became a process with many different dimensions and layers. For some reason, it makes me want to go back to shooting street photography, to the sole purpose of documenting something—an event perhaps, to documenting things that are actually happening. Images that aren’t posed. Something that is the exact opposite of what see nowadays. Not the images we see in magazines, not the images we see on instagram—posed, trying to look candid photos. I crave images, moments perhaps that are often not noticed. Images that are still in their moment, that can somehow exist autonomously.
Sensibility. I’ve come to the conclusion that sensibility is the component that allows us to connect with each other and the world. Art is mainly about expression and comprehending other’s consciousness after all. But of course, it’s not everything. I suppose it’s the beginning of everything. Perhaps, that’s a better way of putting it. During this term, I stumbled upon a text written by Merleau-Ponty, a French philosopher. In his writing, he discusses the idea of “chiasmus.” He begins with talking about how our happiness and the very core of our being is based on our own fundamental narcissism. We must be acknowledged by another consciousness to be able to acknowledge our own consciousness. We can say the object is here and now, but we cannot say the same thing about our own existence. Our existence is only made true(?) or solidified when proven to be “here” by another consciousness. He also points out the adhesion of our carnal self and our mental self is so close, it’s almost impossible to find the in between. If it even exists, that is. We often overlook this fact. All of this brings me back to questioning what does being human mean. It is impossible to answer this question. Very much like our comprehension of everything and anything really. Our physical experience with the world––is everything all together and separate at the same time. For a thing to be whole, it must have its separate parts. I suppose we can use this analogy on everything––including the notion of art and humanity itself. We can only understand art and humanity through different examples. Through these examples, the concept itself becomes concrete. But then again, there’s always tension when something is whole. Looking through, examining the parts breaks the tension. This process allows us, through our sensibility, to glance at the possibilities that can exist between boundaries. In the end, we must accept the paradox(tension) that exists in the very core of our being, and embrace this, “uncertainty.”
During this course, we spent a lot of time discussing what art means, the power in art, the possibilities of art changing the world. I come to an understanding that we spent the majority of time understanding art as a language. An understanding that is extremely peculiar. Different from direct communication, art is something that brings ambiguity to the table. The process of comprehending art is something extremely intuitive. With the magic in a chunk of meat we call brain, we are able to make associations with experiences and memories. The main purpose of art is to hope––after exposure, the spectator can walk away with something. Whatever that something may be. Art is supposed to evoke speculation. As long as the spectator walks away with something, they are changed. Regarding the degree of change that takes place in the spectator? No one has an answer to how much an individual is changed. We can only hope that change itself is gradual. There’s no overnight change. Very much like how everything is formed really. Like history, our society, language, everything requires time. Time to be formed. Everything happens now. We look back to our past to comprehend how things have been changed, in hopes of making our future better. Perhaps there is no past, no future, only an eternal now. I suppose this circles back to the concept of technology and its relation to evolution. Technology is definitely not purely discovery. I suppose the parts of it already exist in this universe. We are only taking our time to “discover” the parts/things that make it happen. Technology itself is a language. Images, art, technology––they are all about embracing uncertainty.
I’m Catherine Chang, technically Canadian, ethnically half Taiwanese, half Vietnamese. I spent(spend) half of my life living in Canada and the other half living in Asia. I aspire to become a true global citizen. I’m currently still exploring what exactly a “global citizen” mean. I suppose I’m the kind of “artist” (if I do call myself one) who doesn’t know how to draw, doesn’t know how to paint. Photography is my main choice of medium when it comes to creating things.
When it comes to taking photos, I’ve realized that it is easy to take beautiful photos—photos with artistic value, but it is difficult to have meaning in them. I’m currently exploring and learning how to make photos mean something, how to communicate better with photography, and how to make people see what I wish to show them.
When it comes to images, I mainly focus on images that are still. This course is going to be a great opportunity for me to expand my understanding of what is an image. And to explore images that aren’t so still. When we talk about images, does it include video? A video is just a group of still images after all.
Being a life long learner has always been one of my goals in this lifetime since high school. However, I’ve discovered that it is easy to become passive in life at times. It’s difficult to take a grasp on life and actively make meaning/sense out of it sometimes we just let things happen to us. I’m excited to keep myself active and develop the ability to understand whatever reality means to me.
My chosen image for this assignment is a photo I took in Romania during the summer of 2017. It is a one point perspective photo depicting the inside of a garment factory. The factory workers are lined up at the centre of the photo and disappearing into the vanishing point. The lights hanging from the ceiling of the factory act as leading lines for the photos. The environment in the is not particularly organized—unfinished products are scattered on the counters next to the workers, the workers aren’t wearing uniforms, lighting fixtures and electrical cords are not organized.
I took this photo when I was tagging along on a business trip in Europe. We were visiting garment factories in Romania––looking for potential investments. It was my first time in Romania, and our Italian business partner offhandedly joked about how “Romania is just like Cambodia but white!” It was funny, we all laughed although the statement was somewhat racist(?)
There’s personal significance in this photo because it was my first experience of getting to know the insides of the fashion industry. Technically people aren’t allowed to document these places but I was on this “business trip,” therefore I had the chance to play around with my camera and take some interesting photos for documentary purposes. During this trip, I learned about some scams in fashion and how the words “Made in Italy” is mostly a joke for some brands. Nowadays, everything is “Made in China,” things that are made in Europe has always been perceived as something that’s more valuable. What the public doesn’t know about some brands unnamed is that they are actually producing in other parts of Europe, and export the products to Italy to put on the “Made in Italy” tags.
This trip was a more in-depth learning experience for me. It showed me how ridiculously over-priced things are, and how capitalism is deeply embedded in our society. During the first week of class, prof briefly mentioned automation. I personally think the fashion industry challenges the idea of automation. Are the luxury handmade products ever going to be made by robots? Perhaps not in the next ten years but some time later.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/18BUlf7AUhvRhocDmNkjOTfPQaKmwqyXRV-6tdSEO1-k/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KyH3YryYzVp15CtLEl3ZKCk0Ye5ZXLsT_YMEsWjBEZE/edit
Hello Catherine
The google page is set to private and we cannot see it. Thanks for the comments!
We are exposed to so many photographic images on a daily basis. Text is not the only way to communicate in the modern day society. People are able to communicate with images only. After reading the article, it gave me a more concrete understanding of the photographic realm. Below are some of my favourite quotes from the article:
“transforming photographic practice into something heterogeneous, performative, seamless and infinite.”
“Instead of assuming that photography is a mechanism that transforms reality into images, we can invert the terms and see the photographer as a translator, as a facilitator of narratives.”
“The image-making process is always and necessarily the ‘making of meaning’. The process continually melds past, present and future, cognition and emotion.”
“Inscribing oneself into the image and image-making process is the only way left to participate in life: moving into the core of the image, into the work and the discourse that lies behind the image and becoming part of it, as well as of the medium. Expanded photography is, thus, about experiential truth.”
It seems like it circles back to the validity of meaning in images. It’s so easy to produce images nowadays, but how much value is in your images? Or does it matter? Do people create images just to express their own feelings? Does the image maker think of the images that they are creating when they are making images? Or is it just emotions, atmosphere, expression all bundled up and compacted into an image?
With the emerging technology, the creation of different software…making images has became a process with many different dimensions and layers. For some reason, it makes me want to go back to shooting street photography, to the sole purpose of documenting something—an event perhaps, to documenting things that are actually happening. Images that aren’t posed. Something that is the exact opposite of what see nowadays. Not the images we see in magazines, not the images we see on instagram—posed, trying to look candid photos. I crave images, moments perhaps that are often not noticed. Images that are still in their moment, that can somehow exist autonomously.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11FBtM3rLJrnbI3nfpiaeKj1qk9IqXENg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UWpEIAz–sbdRMAeINomto1XsfnwoX-E/view?usp=sharing
our relationship with technology
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qM3IHfppJHcqvXzwkEQe4qEbXvJxtceN
week 10: our relationship with our phones – the ends of sleep
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1EdRX61Cdq6PufZsOb1Rmz-NWJPIvL9Ny
A compilation of all the notes I took for this course:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17rTbcWcFmAJbXAPDfKehfnUTcyi25DHwiKWzMJE6zH4/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bOb49MYA7pqnvzEB2Ft4GnqLqfjPHw94/view?usp=sharing
Sensibility. I’ve come to the conclusion that sensibility is the component that allows us to connect with each other and the world. Art is mainly about expression and comprehending other’s consciousness after all. But of course, it’s not everything. I suppose it’s the beginning of everything. Perhaps, that’s a better way of putting it. During this term, I stumbled upon a text written by Merleau-Ponty, a French philosopher. In his writing, he discusses the idea of “chiasmus.” He begins with talking about how our happiness and the very core of our being is based on our own fundamental narcissism. We must be acknowledged by another consciousness to be able to acknowledge our own consciousness. We can say the object is here and now, but we cannot say the same thing about our own existence. Our existence is only made true(?) or solidified when proven to be “here” by another consciousness. He also points out the adhesion of our carnal self and our mental self is so close, it’s almost impossible to find the in between. If it even exists, that is. We often overlook this fact. All of this brings me back to questioning what does being human mean. It is impossible to answer this question. Very much like our comprehension of everything and anything really. Our physical experience with the world––is everything all together and separate at the same time. For a thing to be whole, it must have its separate parts. I suppose we can use this analogy on everything––including the notion of art and humanity itself. We can only understand art and humanity through different examples. Through these examples, the concept itself becomes concrete. But then again, there’s always tension when something is whole. Looking through, examining the parts breaks the tension. This process allows us, through our sensibility, to glance at the possibilities that can exist between boundaries. In the end, we must accept the paradox(tension) that exists in the very core of our being, and embrace this, “uncertainty.”
During this course, we spent a lot of time discussing what art means, the power in art, the possibilities of art changing the world. I come to an understanding that we spent the majority of time understanding art as a language. An understanding that is extremely peculiar. Different from direct communication, art is something that brings ambiguity to the table. The process of comprehending art is something extremely intuitive. With the magic in a chunk of meat we call brain, we are able to make associations with experiences and memories. The main purpose of art is to hope––after exposure, the spectator can walk away with something. Whatever that something may be. Art is supposed to evoke speculation. As long as the spectator walks away with something, they are changed. Regarding the degree of change that takes place in the spectator? No one has an answer to how much an individual is changed. We can only hope that change itself is gradual. There’s no overnight change. Very much like how everything is formed really. Like history, our society, language, everything requires time. Time to be formed. Everything happens now. We look back to our past to comprehend how things have been changed, in hopes of making our future better. Perhaps there is no past, no future, only an eternal now. I suppose this circles back to the concept of technology and its relation to evolution. Technology is definitely not purely discovery. I suppose the parts of it already exist in this universe. We are only taking our time to “discover” the parts/things that make it happen. Technology itself is a language. Images, art, technology––they are all about embracing uncertainty.