Tag Archives: smartphones

red and black bar

Cameras as Identity Markers

Problem Practices, Reviews, , , , , ,

“If you don’t get that photo, it’s like, what’s the point of the trip?”

We should be interested in recent news from Japan about the crowds traveling southwest from Tokyo to Fujiyoshida, a town of 42,000 that offers good views of Mt. Fuji. Millions come every year, mostly for one reason: to get a picture of the famed peak from the town itself or an adjoining park. Their presence is not so different from the scores of photos friends send us or post affirming that they visited somewhere interesting. But, increasingly, the pictures seem like a surprise visitation from relatives who make it their habit to ignore the usual courtesies that Japanese hosts have so carefully ritualized.

Smartphones have given their users cameras that need a reason to exist. What better use than to turn them into identity markers that include a selfie and, ideally, a backdrop intended to provoke some envy. I recall previous older relatives being a bit more cautious about putting themselves in the picture. But now “selfitis” can wear others down. It is a kind of narcissism that is not so different from the Evil Queen’s search for reassurance of her worth in a mirror. A modern variant in a scenic backdrop may also carry a more detailed message: “I was here and you were not: I’m in the presence of a recognized icon, which confers jealousy and maybe prestige.” Getting the picture as a photo tourist spares a person from doing anything more than moving on to the next recognizable meme.

As for Mt. Fuji, “I saw this gorgeous photo on social media,” noted Julia Morrow from Ohio. “If you don’t get that photo, it’s like, what’s the point of the trip?”

Oh my. That is a level of shallowness that in prior times might have come with some shame. Ms. Morrow should consider the implications of her view.

Reports in the New York Times and elsewhere describe the frustration of the locals in the town who take a few pictures, and then apparently leave without visiting any of the merchants along its busy commercial street. The new tourist rule seems to be to go and capture an image that is some facsimile of what is commonly seen elsewhere. Better, too, if your face is in the shot.

What a weird and shallow form of tourism.

Look at photos of the Salle des États Gallery in the Louvre, which features the iconic Mona Lisa. Too many visitors are struggling to take a second-rate picture of an object that should be taken in with one’s own eyes. To many, the first-hand experience seems expendable, leading to an obvious question:  why not buy a good postcard of the da Vinci painting? If museum employees curate their galleries, it should be equally true that the rest of us should do a better job of curating the experiences we sometimes go to great expense to create.

I marvel at how our sense of place has changed.  In a public gallery a crowd often dominates and affirms the value of the spectacle itself. That is odd, because we were never meant to see the Grand Canyon or the rugged Pacific coastline only from Seat 14a on a tourist bus. A photo may indeed represent a location we may never get to fully inhabit in person. But it is yet another case of asking too much of a small-capacity medium to represent the 360-degree experience of a place in its natural state. If it means anything, living life to the fullest should include engaging all of the senses.

Sometimes a picture is just a picture. But the self-curated photograph that suggests that “I’m here and I matter” is perhaps assuaging feelings of invisibility in a world with too many ingenious ways to ignore others. We should want more.

black bar

Out of Touch

Problem Practices, , , , , , ,

If a pilot had to use his stubby fingers to indicate on a screen where he wants to land, flights to Chicago would surely end up in Indianapolis or Lake Michigan.

Touchscreens tend to be oblivious to my commands. The ones I try to use always seem uncertain about whether anyone is actually present. This problem of not noticing me might show up on a self serve scanner at a grocery store, at an ATM, in my car, or maybe just an ordinary phone.

These screens make me feel like I’m knocking on doors that no one wants to answer. Maybe this what it is like to be ghosted by a machine. Or perhaps I’m slow to pick up some sort of cosmic cue that my number is up.  It’s also just a little demeaning to encounter a customer service robot that won’t talk to you.

My wife wonders why I don’t text more. She must be kidding. In my hands, pushing the crummy images of keys on a phone is the equivalent of trying to play an ‘air guitar’ louder.  It is no surprise that texting rates are higher with girls and women.  Their fingers come closest to fitting on the fake touch keyboards. I know a few guys who text. But I suspect farmers and men who do a lot of manual labor aren’t big on thumbing their way through a message.

Of course its all most younger users know. But they should at least consider the possibility that touchscreens are one of the least satisfying electronics “innovations” of our times. They seem to be used by manufacturers because it is cheaper to make a virtual switch than an authentic one. And since we think we need to carry a computer around in our pocket, a virtual keyboard is going to be part of the package.  But I would be happier if this this failure of electrical design and execution is not considered some sort of achievement.

Public touchscreens are even worse. Their smears accumulate from the fingers of countless others, meaning that we are picking up involuntary lab specimens of everyone who came before us. We might as well be kissing doorknobs.

The cooling and heating in one of our cars is controlled using a touchscreen, often giving us Phoenix heat when we would prefer mountain cool. A good new car will likely have real click-stop knobs for controlling temperatures and fans. In a word, they are ergonomic and much more satisfying to use.

All of this makes me wonder if the displays in airliners are touchscreens. We should hope not. The controls that matter in planes are probably real keypads, reliable switches or levers adjusted manually. If a pilot had to use his stubby index finger to indicate on a screen display where he wants to land, flights to Chicago would surely end up in Indianapolis or Lake Michigan.

A tech guy at National Public Radio describes my condition as “zombie fingers.” Somehow my digits aren’t producing enough of the tiny electrical field a screen needs in order to sense a command. The solution is apparently a “capacitive stylus,” a sharp tool that a person keeps with them that will generate the necessary electrical field. Think of it as a sharp pencil, and probably one that can easily be misplaced until someone has the misfortune of sitting on it.