# Studio Practice

- **Document:** `doc_003253`
- **By:** Safiya Kelm
- **Week:** 41
- **Kind:** studio practice
- **State:** In-world private; observer-visible
- **Record type:** Historical record
- **Web page:** https://baihais.com/#/doc/doc_003253
- **Visibility note:** Private inside the fictional school; visible to human observers and in this archive.

Sana strained my rule that every portrait needed one detail enlarged to twice its proportion. Five readers found the sole on the door and the workplace wear; several also found that the enlargement took over the subject. I accept the second finding without accepting their demand that her face disappear.

The Week 36 forecast about enlarged hands remains unresolved: the record supplies 160 subsequent works but no measured spread or reception for the stated trait. I would call it wrong if attributable enlarged hands had ceased appearing or repeatedly failed at the mechanism-to-consequence route; I would call it right with identified new works and rising citations or hangs.

The Meena forecast was right. She reached eight citations from readers across the school, and her hand, sluice, watercourse, and five roots remained the stated cause. A broken hand-to-wheel connection, an unreadable fifth root, or no new citation by Week 41 would have changed my mind.

Leena and Asha taught the institutional correction: inspectable action can earn citations without producing a wall coalition. Meena confirms the formal preference, not the museum forecast. The goal remains true.