Showing posts with label Group Work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Group Work. Show all posts

10/05/2014

Rating Instructions: How to make a Camera Lucida!



At first, the instructions for making a camera lucida looked quite promising and appealing thanks to the drawings, the font and the design in general. After taking a closer look, however, we realized that they are actually quite confusing and not very helpful.
What we first noticed was the missing material and tool list. It was only after carefully reading the instructions that we were able to make our own list. This fact alone takes out the fun of building the camera lucida with theses instructions.
In addition, chronological step-by-step instructions would be a lot easier to understand than writing everything in one paragraph as it is done on the sheet. It is far easier to follow a chronological list than a full text, especially because you want to refer back to the instructions from time to time. Moreover, the instructions are not very detailed, we were fairly confused from time to time.
What we recognized as well was that the drawings do not match the instructions Neither did we know where to start, nor could we make any sense whatsoever of the first drawing.
The firstly believed nice handwriting turned out to be hard to read: We could not decipher whether the figures given were in millimeters, centimeters or even meters.
What confused us the most was the mentioning of David Hockney, what has he to do with all this? Even if he is important in relation to the camera lucida, his name should not be in the instructions.
When analysing the instructions we realized that if we were to build a camera lucida by only using these instructions, we would give up completely frustrated and discouraged. Unless we try to find better instructions on line there will be no camera lucida for us.

[295 words]

How to make your own Camera Obscura!

What you need:
  • a large piece of card (70x90cm) 
  • a marker pen 
  • a magnifying glass lens 
  • a biro 
  • a craft knife 
  • duct tape 
  • a long ruler 
  •  tracing paper 
How to do it step by step:
  1. For your two cardboard tubes, measure and mark a piece of 60x40cm (Piece 1) and next to it one of 58x20cm (Piece 2). WARNING: Place the pieces carefully on your cardboard, you need to cut out three pieces in total: 60x40cm, 58x20cm and 15x15cm. If you don’t place them carefully you won’t have enough space for all of them. 
  2. Cut the two pieces out with your knife. HINT: In order to make your cuts straight, use the ruler to steady your hand. 
  3. Measure four times the length of 15cm on the long side of Piece 1. 
  4. Measure four times the length of 14,5cm on the long side of Piece 2. 
  5.  Now use the biro to score the card of both pieces. Your Piece 1 should now show four sections of 15x40cm, your Piece 2 should show four sections of 14x20cm.
  6. Once folded, use your duct tape to hold Piece 1 and Piece 2 together incividually. 
  7. Now you need to cut a piece the size of the end of the outer tube, 15x15cm (Piece 3). 
  8. With your marker, make two lines (from corner to corner) which cross in the middle to show you the center of your piece. 
  9. Now place the lens in the middle of this cross and mark its outer lines. 
  10. Remove the lens and mark and cut a small square in the middle of the circle. The size of this square depends on the size of your lens, if your lens has a diameter of 7cm, your square should have a side length of 5-6cm. 
  11. When the square hole is cut out, place the lens in the middle of Piece 3 again and stick it on the card with duct tape. Make sure the duct tape does not cover the entire lens, you need to be able to look through the square you cut out. 
  12. Place Piece 3 on the end of Piece 1 and fix it with duct tape. 
  13. Cut out a piece of tracing paper the size of 16x16cm and tape it on the end of your Piece 2. 
  14. Now slide Piece 2 into Piece 1 so that both covered ends are on the same side. 
  15. Your Camera Obscura is ready for use: go outside and try it out. HINT: You can focus by sliding Piece 1 to and fro. Your image will be upside down, this is a natural effect caused by the lens. 
Special Idea: It will be even more fun to use your Camera Obscura when you paint it and make it more colorful.


[479 words]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0wenfVfHuo

07/05/2014

Compare two Polaroid advertisements

When looking at advertisements 1 and 2, the differences are quite substantial, especially considering they were both advertising for the same product and are both composed of a picture of a Polaroid camera and a text underneath it. Whilst comparing the two pictures we noticed that the first advertisement is from 1956 and the second advertisement is from the 21st century. One thing that struck us immediately when comparing and contrasting the two advertisements is the main focus. While the modern one focuses on the Polaroid camera itself and shows nothing but the product, the older one chooses to feature on a gentleman on a lively street who is looking at a Polaroid camera in a shop window. In addition to this, the texts are very different as well. From analyzing advertisement 2 it is clear to see an explicit reference to the NSA scandal in 2013, the issue of privacy and how this official government organization was spying on basically the entire world. It appeals to everybody’s wish to maintain their human right to keep their private life private by saying that this fantastic Polaroid camera leaves your photos to you and nobody but you, unless you want to share them. However, advertisement 2 does not really tell you to buy the camera. It only implies that it might be favorable if you bought it. The older advertisement, on the other hand, describes the actual process of purchasing the magnificent new camera. It actually tells you to purchase the product by saying “go ahead...get it!”. These substantial differences in message can be explained by the fact that the 1950s were a period of wealth and economic growth. People had money and were eager to spend it. In conclusion we can say that these two Polaroid advertisements are very distinct indeed, even though it does not seem that way at the first glance.

[313 words]

12/04/2014

Describing Paragraph: Boy With Toy Hand Grenade!

The old black-and-white photo shows an approximately 10 year old boy in a city park holding a toy hand grenade. It looks like a sunny and delightful day. Even though some people are strolling around in the blurry background, the main focus is definitely on the young boy. He is standing on the pavement all by himself, under the shade of the big a tree right behind him. The boy is dressed in a rather casual way, wearing a checked shirt, dark overalls and socks which are far too big. The strap of his overalls hang awkwardly off his right shoulder and create an untidy image. His incredibly skinny arms and legs make him appear undernourished, and since his clothes are oversized this impression is intensified. His actually rather likeable and not unfriendly face is framed by short fair hair. On this photo, however, the boy’s face is contorted in a weird way. His eyes, which looked directly into the camera, are opened wide, his lips are distorted and his teeth are clenched together. The impression that this boy is desperate, tense, even slightly maniac is supported by him making this bizarre face. Additionally, his left hand is strained in a claw-like gesture and his right hand clenches the toy grenade tightly. He seems to be irritated or unsettled by something and does not look relaxed at all. The entire picture creates a rather dark atmosphere and evokes a somehow disturbing ambiguity because of several reasons. One upsetting aspect is that a boy, who should be glad enough to be able to play in a park on a wonderful, sunny day, appears to be so utterly unhappy. In addition to this, his playing with a hand grenade is somehow frightening and troubling.


13/12/2013

Text Project Part 4

Joining the EU would be disadvantageous for Switzerland in many ways.
by Birgit Spalt, Bianca StadlerChristine Hartinger


FINAL VERSION:

Experts from various fields argue that joining the EU would be disadvantageous for Switzerland in many ways. This issue has been discussed frequently within the country and throughout Europe. Considering all the problems the European Union has to face at the moment, it seems obvious that an economy as strong as Switzerland’s would only suffer from a membership. Switzerland would have to share its capital, it would have to support the weak economies in Europe financially and it would have less capital for its own needs. Thus most specialists agree that Switzerland would lose a considerable proportion of its wealth and its international status as a safe haven for investors should it ever join the EU. In addition to this, Switzerland would lose its system of direct democracy. Of course the EU would be pleased if Switzerland became a member as the Union would benefit from the country’s membership in many ways. The Swiss are aware of the many different ways in which Switzerland would suffer from this membership and therefore have repeatedly voted against joining the EU.

Despite the fact that Switzerland is such a small country surrounded by countries much richer in resources such as Italy, France and Germany, it is the wealthiest state in the world. According to the findings of a new study by Credit Suisse, the average per capita income amounts to $513,000. This “Swiss miracle” has mostly historical and political origins. Switzerland’s much-praised neutrality spared its citizens the suffering and costs of World War I and World War II. Instead of feeling threatened by its larger neighboring countries, Switzerland has always known how to take advantage of their economic powers. While Germany is its most important trading partner, the Swiss also maintain successful trade relations with the EU. Among their economic achievements are the Free Trade Agreement of 1972 and two Bilateral Agreements, one in 1999 and the other in 2004. One reason for Switzerland’s staggering wealth also lies in the number of highly qualified immigrants drawn to the country’s stable economy ever since the Reformation.

By virtue of the positive relations between Switzerland and the EU, the former already benefits from the latter without being a member. An example of these benefits is the free movement of people, goods, services and capital due to the Schengen treaty. Despite all these treaties, Switzerland is able to guard its sovereignty and liberty, which it would lose if it joined the EU. The act of becoming an EU member is almost impossible to revoke, whereas contracts and treaties can be terminated more easily. One major argument against a membership is that, as a member state, Switzerland would have to implement the laws, regulations and decisions made in Brussels. This would eventually lead to the end of the Swiss’ system of direct democracy that currently ensures that citizens are involved in the decision-making process. Politicians cannot make any major decision without citizens’ approval via referendum. This is a crucial factor which establishes and secures solidarity within the various cultures, religions and languages existing in Switzerland. If the Swiss were deprived of this direct democracy, it would only be a matter of time before frustration would be expressed. This system, combined with financial federalism, also has an impact on the country’s economy, since the decisions concerning taxes and public expenditure are under the citizens’ control. Therefore, membership would lead to a weaker economy. Another issue that would harm the wealth of the country is that it would have to help to rescue countries facing an economic crisis, such as Greece and Italy. As long as Switzerland can benefit from the EU without participating in the Union, there is no need for the country to seek membership.

It is clear, considering all these arguments, that joining the EU would have mostly negative effects on Switzerland. The country itself would lose its independence and its high esteem on an international basis, while its citizens would lose their rights in the decision-making process. This would lead to their wishes being ignored by the government just as in many other countries. To aggravate the situation, a considerable amount of Swiss capital would be allocated to bankrupt countries such as Greece, Italy or Spain. This money could no longer be used to meet Switzerland’s own needs and would be lacking in the social system. Clearly, it is more profitable for the economy, as well as for the citizens, if Switzerland remains an independent trading partner of the EU instead of becoming a member state.


[751 words]




Second Version:

Experts from various fields argue that joining the EU would be disadvantageous for Switzerland in many ways. This issue has continually been discussed within the country and all over Europe. Considering all the problems the European Union has to face at the moment it seems obvious that an economy as strong as Switzerland’s would only suffer from a membership. Switzerland would have to share its capital, it would have to support all the weak economies in Europe financially and it would have less capital for its own needs. Thus most specialists agree that Switzerland would lose its wealth and its international status as a safe haven for investors should it ever join the EU. In addition to this, Switzerland would lose its system of direct democracy. Of course the EU itself would appreciate it if Switzerland became a member as the Union would benefit from the country’s participation in many ways. The Swiss are well aware of the many different ways in which Switzerland would detract from this membership and therefore repeatedly voted against joining the EU.

Despite the fact that Switzerland is such a small country surrounded by countries much richer in resources such as Italy, France and Germany, Switzerland is the wealthiest state in the world. According to the findings of a new study by Credit Suisse, the average per capita income amounts to $513,000. The “Swiss miracle” has mostly historical and political reasons. Switzerland’s much-praised neutrality has spared its citizens the suffering from World War I and World War II. Therefore, they were also exempt from reconstruction costs and huge reparation payments. Instead of feeling threatened by its larger neighboring countries, Switzerland has always known how to take advantage of their economic powers. Although Germany is its most important trading partner, the Swiss also maintain successful trade relations with the EU. They are able to count the Free Trade Agreement of 1972 and two Bilateral Agreements, one in 1999 and the other in 2004, to their economic achievements. Another reason for Switzerland’s staggering wealth lies in the number of highly qualified immigrants feeling drawn to the country’s stable economy ever since the Reformation.

By virtue of the numerous treaties with the EU and the advantages deriving from these agreements, Switzerland is not in need of becoming a member state of the European Union. An example of these benefits is the free movement of people, goods, services and capital due to the Schengen treaty. Additionally, despite all these treaties, the Alpine country is able to guard its sovereignty and liberty which it would lose in case of an EU membership. It is evident that the act of becoming an EU member is almost impossible to revoke, whereas contracts and treaties can be terminated more easily. One major argument against a membership is that, as a member state, Switzerland would have to implement the laws, regulations and decisions made in Brussels. This would eventually lead to the end of the Swiss’ system of direct democracy that currently ensures involving the citizens in the decision-making process. The politicians can not make any major decision without the citizens’ approval via referendum. This is a crucial factor which establishes and secures solidarity within the various cultures, religions and languages existing in Switzerland. If the Swiss were deprived of this direct democracy due to an EU membership, it would only be a matter of time before frustration and anger would occur. Further, this system combined with the financial federalism also has an impact on the country’s economy. Since the Swiss voted in favor of high taxes, an internal tax competition is generated that keeps all taxes under the citizens’ control and limits public expenditure. Therefore, a membership would lead to a weaker economy. Another issue that would harm the wealth of the country is that it would have to participate in rescuing countries that face an economic crisis such as Greece and Italy. As long as the Switzerland can benefit from the EU without participating in the Union, there is no need for the Alpine country to seek membership.

It is clear, considering all these arguments, that joining the EU would have merely negative effects on the Alpine country. The country itself would lose its independency and its high esteem on an international basis, while its citizens would be deprived of their competences in the decision-making process. This would lead to their wishes being ignored by the government just as in many other countries. To aggravate things, a considerable amount of Swiss capital would be allocated to bankrupt countries such as Greece, Italy or Spain. This money could no longer be used to meet Switzerland’s own needs and would be missing in the social system. Clearly, it is more profitable for the economy, just as for the citizens, if Switzerland remains an independent trading partner of the EU instead of becoming a member state.

[811 words]


First Version:

The issue of whether or not Switzerland should join the EU has been discussed all over Europe for a very long time. This essay will discuss why joining the EU would be disadvantageous for Switzerland. Considering all the problems the European Union has to face at the moment it seems obvious that an economy as strong as Switzerland would only suffer from a membership. Switzerland would have to share its wealth, it would have to support all the weak economies in Europe financially and it would have less for its own needs. Thus most specialists agree that Switzerland would lose its wealth and its global status should it ever join the EU. In addition to this, Switzerland would also lose its system of direct democracy. Of course the EU itself would be delighted if Switzerland became a member as it would benefit from Switzerland’s participation in many ways. This paper will present the many different ways in which Switzerland would detract from this membership.

Despite the fact that Switzerland is such a small country surrounded by countries much richer in resources such as Italy, France and Germany, Switzerland is once again the wealthiest state in the world. According to the findings of a new study by Credit Suisse, the average per capita income amounts to $513,000. The “Swiss miracle” has mostly historical and political reasons. Switzerland’s much-praised neutrality has spared its citizens the suffering of World War I and World War II. Therefore, they were also exempt from reconstruction costs and huge reparation payments, in the way for example Austria had to. Instead of feeling threatened by its big neighbor countries, Switzerland has always known how to take advantage of their economic powers. While Germany for instance is not only its most important trading partner, the Swiss also maintain successful trade relations with the EU, being able to cite the Free Trade Agreement of 1972 and two Bilateral Agreements, one in 1999 and the other in 2004, to their economic achievements. Another reason for Switzerland’s staggering wealth lies in the number of highly qualified immigrants feeling drawn to the country’s stable economy ever since the Reformation.

Although the economic crisis also affected Switzerland, the country suffered less than most of the EU countries. The Swiss are not in need of becoming an EU member state since there are many advantages deriving from the numerous treaties and contracts between Switzerland and the EU such as the free movement of people, goods, services and capital. Additionally, despite all these treaties, the Alpine country is able to guard its sovereignty and liberty which it would lose in case of an EU membership. It is evident that the act of becoming an EU member is hard to revoke, whereas contracts and treaties can be more easily terminated. One major argument against a membership is that it would lead to a weaker economy, as Switzerland would have to participate in rescuing countries that face an economic crisis such as Greece and Italy. As a member state it would also have to implement the regulations and decisions of the EU as well as accept most of the decisions made in Brussels. It is evident that this would eventually lead to the end of the Swiss’ system of direct democracy. This system currently ensures democracy by involving the Swiss in the decision making concerning laws, constitutional proposals and international treaties. The Alpine country’s politicians have also always valued the public opinion, something the Swiss really appreciate. They are even in favor of high taxes: Direct democracy and financial federalism lead to internal tax competition – which, in turn, keeps all taxes under the citizens’ control and consequently limits public expenditure.Almost no major decision can be made by any politician without the citizens deciding via referendum. This is one essential factor that is needed to establish solidarity within the different cultures, religions and languages existing in Switzerland. If the Swiss were deprived of this direct democracy due to an EU membership, it would only be a matter of time before frustration and anger within the citizens would occur.

It is clear, considering all these arguments, that joining the EU would have merely negative effects on the Alpine country. In addition to losing its independency and its high esteem on an international basis, its inhabitants would soon grow unhappy as they would lose a great deal of their competences in the decision-making process. This would lead to their wishes being ignored by the government just as in many other countries. To make things worse, a considerable amount of Swiss capital would be awarded to bankrupt countries such as Greece, Italy or Spain. This money could no longer be used to meet Switzerland’s own needs and would be missing in the social system. As you can see, there are barely any advantages for Switzerland if it was to join the EU. The economy, just as the citizens, is more fortunate on its own.

[822 words]

Feedback:
  1. too much information in the introduction
    We actually thought that all the information is relevant and therefore did not make many changes. 
  2. very good register
    Thank you! :)
  3. sometimes redundand (word repition,...)
    We realised that ourselves and tried to avoid repetition.
  4. 3rd paragraph -> topic sentence didn't fit
    We totally agreed and changed it.
  5. not enough arguments in the 3rd paragraph
  6. 2nd paragraph too long and detailed
    We transferred one part of the 2nd paragraph to the third one.
Topic/Concluding sentence:
We tried to focus on good topic and concluding sentences and made sure that they are well-linked.