I have read Simon Brainbridges article a couple of times and I have seen the Robbie Cooper Immersion work when it just came out. So I was drawn to it as I never really researched it other than watching the video of the kids playing computer games.
Watching the piece again I just love the concept, you can pause on just about any frame and have a print. The range of emotions or the lack thereof is so contrasting and the audio of the gameplay ads to feeling of each portrait. Would it work as well as an exhibition of still portraits without the video showing the viewer where the still frames came from? I don't think it would, it would be a set of nice portraits but the feeling you get from each of these are from the story gained from watching the video.
In a time where moving portraits have become something that a lot of photographers take this is a study not only of how we react to media but also a reflection of popular culture. This is how people react to the media that they consume (usually behind closed doors).
Has technology enabled this type of project to be made? Yes its shot on a Red Epic which allows a still frame to be taken from any frame due to the sensor size. On the negative is this like fishing with a hand grenade? Where you get capture 25 images every second. With this approach does it kill the "decisive moment" that Cartier-bresson was so well known for? Does it remove the skill of the photographer, where the photographer no longer needs to take the image once they are happy with the frame but rather captures everything. Is this different from modern digital photographers? Yes and no. Yes it is different as you now have 90,000 frames for every hour where modern digtial photographers will have taken anything upwards of 1600 images per day. Compare that to a thirty years ago where ten rolls of film was the norm.
I like the idea and I like the images but the more I look at it the more I question if it is a photography project or a video supported by stills to fill space in galleries?
Jon Levy - Founder Foto8 talking about documentary in the art gallery.
The points I take out of the interview with Levy are
I agree with him that documentary is a form of story telling.
There is ambiguity between journalism and art. Each person viewing a project will have an oppinion on whether it is art or photojournalism.
In the end every story be it art or photo journalism it comes back to the premise of story telling and it's even the criteria for editorial decisions that photo8 makes too.
I agree with Jon, photojournalism or documentary as we know it today is a Westen view of the rest of the world. But with technology it levels the playing field allowing photographers from all over the world to participate in the same forum.
Lastly Jon makes a point about point of view. I think its essential to bring a point of view to a project, but to have that point of view from the start and not in hind sight once the images are printed. The point of view is almost the driving force behind projects.