
Photographs: Removed - Reedx
https://www.removed.social/series/
======
32bitkid
I get, and appreciate, where I feel the artist is going with this: a
reflection on the loneliness epidemic and our relationship to technology.
_BUT_ I think one layer of meta out is just as creepy and weirdly out of
context once you start erasing things. Namely the picture of the couple in bed
is another level of creepy if there is some guy/girl hovering over them
staring at them with a digitally-erased camera.

~~~
zacharycohn
You're uh... aware that the photographer didn't sneak into their room without
them knowing, right?

~~~
32bitkid
I guess what I'm trying to say is which is more depressing or sad: a couple
ignoring each other, or a guy watching a couple ignore each other, or even, if
I were to turn the lens on myself, a guy watching another guy watching a
couple ignore each other.

~~~
dragonwriter
> a couple ignoring each other

Being back to back in physical contact, even while also engaging in some other
activity, is not necessarily (or, IME, even most likely) ignoring each other.

~~~
32bitkid
I agree with what you are saying, in regards to a healthy relationship… But,
I'm nearly positive that's not the message that is being conveyed by the
artist/photographer in _this_ image/collection of images. So, I'm not really
sure where you are going with this.

~~~
dragonwriter
> But, I'm nearly positive that's not the message that is being conveyed by
> the artist/photographer in this image/collection of images. So, I'm not
> really sure where you are going with this.

I actually think it's very much part of the message of the particular image it
concerns (at least, it's part of what I take from it because of how it
resonates with my personal experience), to wit, the whole collection speaks to
the pervasiveness of the smartphone in modern society, and the image in
question speaks specifically into it's insertion into moments of casual
intimacy.

------
peapicker
Looking at these photos makes me realize we have a major body posture problem.
No wonder people are having pain in the neck and back a lot!

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.

------
mooreed
...the moment when you realize you are depressed about the ubiquity of phone
addictions whilst on your phone.

------
keiferski
I’ve been getting into the habit of turning my phone off, putting it in a
drawer, and leaving it there for as much time as possible.

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.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
In a lot of these pictures, you could probably substitute a small paperback
book. When I was growing up before cellphones, I knew a lot of people who
would keep a small book with them that they would read in line or when at a a
table.

------
hopler
Title "Removes phones from photos" is a false statement not claimed in the
linked site. Mods, please fix.

------
soneca
An acquaintance of mine became a photographer and also made a collection of
people with phones on the streets.

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/](http://www.thomasfreier.com/fotografia-celular-eles/)

------
ydnaclementine
Pretty goofy looking without a cellphone

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

~~~
sand500
In his video he approaches people on the street and asks them to pose without
the phone.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8TsV3IExYg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8TsV3IExYg)

~~~
patrickbolle
Off topic: I've never seen this notice on Youtube before:

CGTN is funded in whole or in part by the Chinese government

Screenshot:
[https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/7bd277c...](https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/7bd277cf-7466-4f26-8618-c2dcd06090aa.png)

~~~
yorwba
I guess it's related to CGTN having had to register as foreign agents:
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-has-
ordered-...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-has-ordered-key-
chinese-state-media-firms-to-register-as-foreign-agents-1537296756)

Presumably YouTube is also required to indicate that status.

------
minikites
This is one of those things that seems deep but really isn't, maybe a step
above Banksy. I don't mean to imply that there aren't issues with our
relationship with technology, but these photos are an awfully ham-fisted
criticism. I read this article back when it was published and it's stuck with
me because it provides a more nuanced and thoughtful view of our relationship
with technology.

[https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/camp-...](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/camp-
grounded-digital-detox-and-the-age-of-techno-anxiety/277600/)

>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?

~~~
metamet
My largest criticism of our oneness with phone is that, no matter how
responsible you are with them, they removes you from being fully present.

For consumption of media--which most people use it for--it's like sitting down
and opening a book or paging through a magazine. When you're with others, it
immediately puts you into a private space that your mind is attempting to
connect to, disconnecting from the present.

It's counter to mindfulness. Even when you open up your phone for just 10
seconds to check on something, you're distracting yourself from being present
--regardless of how responsible you are with it.

That said, I don't have any problems with hanging out with friends or family
and reading a book. I've done that my whole life, but it's not appropriate for
times when you're trying to actively be there and have a connection with them.

There's little difference between having a friend pull our a book or their
phone when trying to watch a movie together, but our phones are so intertwined
with who we are, it's easy to not see it that way.

------
jancsika
Intriguing.

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.

------
csours
I try not to complain about this, but something is super janky with the
carousel. It feels like it loads 2 pictures ahead and doesn't let you show the
next until the one after that is loaded.

------
nickchuck
Whoa, how did they get a pic of Dave Chappelle!?
[https://static1.squarespace.com/static/561bb57ae4b0357b729e1...](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/561bb57ae4b0357b729e16de/5bf2d73fb8a045aac144e930/5bf2d79c562fa747a5554135/1542642457968/Eric-
Pickersgill-Removed-Snoopys-Low-Resolution.jpg?format=2500w)

~~~
oh_sigh
Dave is way more jacked than that these days. He's an absolute tank

------
aasasd
I finally realized that SE Asia just looks like the 70s to me, for some
reason. Only with better tech.

(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](https://youtube.com/watch?v=i3QPTefh7bQ)

------
ralusek
"[Phone/Technology/Social Media/War/Orange Man/Consumerism] Bad" all seem like
EXTREMELY tapped markets in the art world. This seems like something a deep
middle-schooler would put out, in my opinion.

------
sneakernets
Ogg remember when tool didn't exist. People lived in moment. Now Ogg see plow
tilling field and just shake head. What happened to working together for
betterment of society? Now beast pull plow?

------
ElTimuro
Same works if you remove a spoon and porridge. This is uttlery meaningless
even if it were real life. Projecting behavioural triggers on technology is
flawed most of the time.

------
ars
I wish they weren't black and white, but otherwise they are very interesting
to look at.

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

~~~
jake-low
Worth noting that the use of black and white isn't just an Instagram-style
filter being applied in Photoshop; the photographer is making these images on
black and white film, using a large format camera that's not too different
from the ones people were using to take portraits a hundred years ago. You can
see a picture of the artist and his camera on this page [0].

[0]: [https://www.ericpickersgill.com/about-eric-pickersgill-
remov...](https://www.ericpickersgill.com/about-eric-pickersgill-
removed-2-1-1/)

~~~
ars
Why do that? There is color large format film.

It's one thing if it made the end result better, but it doesn't.

------
habitue
Aw jeez, this is really depressing

~~~
dymk
Would you think the same of an art project that removed, say, watches from
people's wrists as they check the time? Or maybe hammers from the hands from
people working in construction?

~~~
rwc
No, because these things don’t isolate us from each other. You have a number
of couples in the photographs that are close physically yet miles and miles
apart.

~~~
dymk
Are you honestly saying that this (neat) art piece, which is of carefully
curated shots taken over months, is general proof that phones are some
fundamentally different mode of isolation, compared to any other tool that
humans have had?

~~~
l33tbro
I would actually be interested to hear you explain why, in terms of social
isolation, phones are not a fundamentally different mode of isolation than any
other human tool.

~~~
salmanarshad321
Social media are designed to be as addictive as possible. Smartphones have
replaced a great number of tools and devices. At the end of the day it's up to
the individuals to not spend a lot of time on their phones, but, I can see
it's hard for most people. At least around me (including myself). Another
thing I've noted is the exhaustion experienced after spending a long time on
your smartphone.

------
artur_makly
Someone, please invent an AI that can remove all automobiles from the street.

------
fjp
reddit.com/r/im14andthisisdeep

------
crazygringo
As an artistic statement this just feels... infantile.

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.

~~~
hopler
You seem to be projecting your own feelings onto the pictures.

Do you also find nude photographs infantile?

~~~
bradenb
I feel like the OP was making a totally reasonable argument. Your comment was
a huge overreaction.

------
jiggliemon
By the title you’d assume these are candid shots of people in real life
situations with the phones digitally removed.

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.

~~~
atq2119
It's affect, not effect, in this case:
[https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/affect-or-
effect](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/affect-or-effect)

(I'm sorry. My English is far from perfect either, I just really stumbled over
this one for some reason.)

~~~
theandrewbailey
While that situation is often the case, _effect_ is used correctly as a verb
in this context. From your link:

> When used as a verb _effect_ means ‘to bring something about as a result’.
> It’s most often used in a formal context as oppose to everyday English:

> Growth in the economy can only be _effected_ by stringent economic controls.

> The new policies did little to _effect_ change.

> The prime minister _effected_ many policy changes.

Edit: there are two places were effect is used as a verb in that comment. I'm
referring to the last one.

~~~
yorwba
Is the viewer brought about as a result of the production of said images?

~~~
theandrewbailey
No, but the content is brought about as a result of the production of said
images.

~~~
yorwba
So "I don’t know how the production of said images will effect the viewer"
should be "I don’t know how the production of said images will _affect_ the
viewer".

