Photographs: Removed

Also, the physicality of looking down all the time, hunched over, bent neck, is a literal embodiment of the word "downcast" -- and we wonder why depression is at an all time high. We literally practice being downcast all the time.

Looking at this and having these thoughts makes me realize that I need to adjust my phone habits.

It sounds absurd, but the results have been fantastic and similar to what I’ve experienced from meditation, long-distance running or similar activities. It’s best described as feeling “grounded”, as if I’m actually alive in the world and not just floating from one room to the next. I end up noticing more about my neighborhood as well, especially irrelevant little things like floor tile patterns or differences between plants on the sidewalk.

My best theory on the topic is: if you only speak one language, the vast majority of internet is essentially a fairly small, uniform, static entity. Whether you log on from Tokyo or Toronto, the software is the same - same colors on Google, same design on Facebook, etc. When you unplug, this uniformity largely disappears and you’re forced to really pay attention to the world around you. As a result, the world feels much bigger.

But instead of going for the easy societal critic, he got a more diverse use of phones into his photos.

You can see several occasions where phones were being used as a tool for social, presential, phisycal-world connection between people having a good time.

Worth taking a look:

http://www.thomasfreier.com/fotografia-celular-eles/

There's one where the phone was covering a lady's face (USA set). I wonder how they did that. Photoshop must be magic

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/camp-...

>Some people feel something is amiss in their relationships, and that technology is to blame. There's a move, cataloged in nearly every magazine, towards seeing the offline as authentic and the online as hollow, false, unreal. This may be a false distinction, digital dualism, as Nathan Jurgenson calls it, but it's a widespread reaction to the technologies at hand.

>The vision promises that if it weren't for all the damn new stuff (like watches), we'd all be sitting around sharing the parts of ourselves that we're ashamed of, supporting others in their most meaningful endeavors, and paying mind only to worthy causes and ideas.

>I refuse to accept that the only good response to an imperfect technology is to abandon it. We need more specific criticisms than the ever-present feeling that "'something's not right." What thing? Developing a political agenda to remake, improve, or forbid technologies requires some sort of rubric: how can I judge what I'm using? What are the deleterious impacts? How are they specific to these media and this time? Which effects are caused by the technologies and which are enabled by the technologies and which just happen to occur through the technologies? What are the ethics? What are the mechanics? What is the baseline?

Seems like the judgment of "depressing" or "creepy" one puts on these images comes from foreknowledge of what the subjects are reading on those phones.

For example-- is there a popular app that helps citizens effectively organize resistance against a burgeoning fascist government without giving side-channel access for nation-state influencers to easily undo that effort?

If the dad were posting on that and the kid viewing the thread, that would seem pretty cool and important.

But I don't think that app exists, which may be close to the fundamental problem than the hardware itself. In reality the overwhelming likelihood is that whatever the pair are reading is not as valuable as the quality time dad and son are missing out on.

(With the exception of Japan and South Korea, of course.)

It's like I still could occasionally catch some Cambodian rock'n'roll around a corner: https://youtube.com/watch?v=i3QPTefh7bQ

The black and white takes away a lot of the impact, it's too bad.

Before phones, people were reading books or magazines separately in bed, or reading newspapers on the train. When I traveled to various third-world countries before phones were a thing and people didn't have money for newspapers, people stared blankly out into space on the train or bus or shared van. People weren't social with strangers. In various modern African cities, I just couldn't believe how much boredom was part of everyday life. And there didn't seem to be any redeeming qualities to the boredom... just boring, boring boredom.

Likewise (back in the US), children out at a cafe with the parents would sit drawing or reading children's books or yes, being bored out of their skulls (instead of on a cell phone now with books or games that practice hand-eye coordination). I remember long car trips as a child as excruciatingly, horribly, mind-numbingly boring.

And as for photos showing someone photographing... we've had cameras for many decades... I don't get the point at all.

I'm not even remotely convinced that phones are somehow making us less social. Rather they save us from extreme boredom, keep us in close touch with out intimate friends all day long if we choose, and even make it so much easier to see people and flexibly change plans. Remember when being "stood up" was a thing? In my experience it's... not, anymore. Someone will send you a message an hour beforehand they won't be able to make it, saving you a trip and letting you make new plans if you want.

The actual method the photographer used was to stage situations, and acquire models to act out scenarios for maximum effect.

I don’t know how the production of said images will effect the viewer - but I think it’s important to point out - as it does effect the content. This is staged art. This isn’t documentary.