Photographers would take portrait pictures of Singaporeans from all walks of life, to go with stories on how the measures would affect the newsmakers. The artists will take the facts and figures and transform them into infographics or diagrams.

The end product is a package that is several pages thick.

I must confess that all this information is sometimes just too much for me to digest.

And surely, I'd believe, there are people out there who feel the same.

Through the Lens (TTL), The Straits Times visual journalism website, has been running multimedia stories since we launched in September last year.

So I thought, "Wouldn't it be great if we could summarise the key measures into a 3-minute multimedia piece?"

Together with my colleague, Neo Xiaobin, we brainstormed several ideas two days before Budget 2011.

We realised that our usual way of marrying photographs with text and sound will not work. It could not show the cause-and-effect of Budget's measures, an aspect which we thought was crucial. We wanted the characters in the story to undergo a change due to the new measures. There has to be some form of visual reinforcement.

"Why not we do it in Lego?" I said.

It would be cute, and fun, to watch. It goes with our concept of keeping it simple. We can manipulate the figures to move in whatever way we want. And, it would be more accessible for younger audiences.

We read the Budget preview stories, and bought nine Lego figures and an assortment of "props" that we thought would most likely be relevant.

Back home, Xiaobin dug up two boxes worth of Lego bricks from her childhood. I plucked out a figure from my only Lego collection left - a spaceship - for the first time in decades. When I compared it with the new ones we bought, mine was all faded.

We then talked about how to tell the story. It was the day before Budget 2011, and we only had an inkling of the measures that would be unveiled.

Even then, things might radically change on February 18.

There was little we could except tie down the concept and filming method. We would shoot with a camera mounted on a tripod, pointed directly above a piece of white paper.

This paper became a stage, a canvas. It gave us more flexibility in producing our stop-motion video. We could move the figures in any manner we want, in ways that 'defy' gravity.

In other words, it allowed us to go a little crazy.

On Budget day, we waited anxiously for the copy of the speech that would be given to the press. A blurb for our video in the papers had already been confirmed for the next day. When we obtained a list of the key measures, it was 3 p.m.

We knew it would be impossible to include all the measures in the video. So, we selected only the ones that we felt affected the most people, and rewrote them in simple and concise phrases.

Then, we storyboarded. We grouped the phrases according to topic and arranged them so that they made for smooth transitions between scenes.

Next, we sketched out how the Lego figures would appear, move and change, for all the scenes. The change can either be literal or metaphorical. Most importantly, it must show cause-and-effect.

After a few slices of pizza with Redbull, we began shooting at 8 p.m. Xiaobin wrote the text in little slips of paper which she torn out. We made minute adjustments to the background and figures for every photo that I took. We swapped the heads and bodies of figures, and even dismembered one of them.

It was an exercise in patience and creativity, under growing fatigue.

Photography ended at midnight. It took another three hours in the editing suite to piece everything together into a video, which we uploaded online at 4 a.m.

Exhausted but happy, we packed the Lego figures away.

Maybe we'll get to play with them again next year.

Click here to watch the video.

By combining photos with audio, and sometimes video, we're able to create a more immersive experience for the viewer.

This also means that the photojournalist has to do more than what is expected of him or her. He or she has to shoot, record sound, and interview, at the same time.

This presents new challenges for us, in terms of workflow before, during, and after an assignment.

Sound was never a consideration before. Now, it means having to constantly think about how to pair visuals with sound. Or vice versa.

A scene or object which might not usually be shot for print, suddenly carries more importance because of the sound it 'emits'. A sound which allows us to create an atmosphere, or drive the story forward.

And then, comes the challenge of deciding when to shoot and when to record sound. Also, what questions must we ask our subjects?

All these while never losing sight of what's important: the story.

Once the assignment is over, how do we make sense of all the material, and structure a coherent and compelling narrative?

The last step involves countless hours working on Final Cut Pro, usually into the wee hours of the night.

That said, the results are satsifying.

On Through the Lens' Multimedia section, you'll be able to watch the videos that we have produced so far.

These are stories about Singaporeans, from the struggles of young weightlifters, to the unconditional love of a mother. We hope you will enjoy them.

Stay tuned for more to come!

Recently, The New Paper ran a story on how he was fined $200 for 15 minutes of snooze time on a park bench. 

Mr Kassim reenacts what he was fined for.
TNP Photo: KUA CHEE SIONG

I was appalled, and at the same time, tickled by the absurdity of what happened. It is a sad allegory of a society that has become obsessed with rules and image, at the expense of compassion and flexibility.

The National Parks Board stated that the fine was due to "misuse" of park facilities. I imagine their explanation went something like this:

"The Visitor should sit upright, with his/her feet planted on the ground (unless you're a child or really short).  Mr Kassim, lying horizontally, is thus misusing the park facility with his improper posture and depriving another Visitor of a seat. Also, he could be mistaken for a squatter."

If so, would I be fined $200 if I took a nap sitting up? Or $100 because, technically, I'm only committing half the offence?

What about people who fall asleep on public library couches or on seats at HDB void decks? Or your coffee-shop uncle who hogs a table for hours downing bottles of beer? The visitors in both scenarios are definitely more common than what you would find in a park.

To me, being in a park is a beautiful experience where one feels free and relaxed. Such a restriction goes against the very nature of the place. 

Granted, we do not want people - homeless or otherwise - to loiter in public areas for security reasons. But I wonder: Can't we nap on a park bench if it's perfectly harmless? Or at least, warn those who do and not fine them for it?

This incident is one of many that reflects our society's rigidness, which I feel, stifles creativity and tolerance. Yes, a park bench is for sitting, but surely park-goers may explore beyond the boundaries of that definition.

Just like how a good photograph doesn't always have to be sharp.