Sutton discusses photographs as a “time-image” (pxi) which record the image of any given moment. This is in direct opposition to video, where time is displayed to us through the frame rate of the video. Immediately I can think of images which might not display any representation of time – even if time was a process in there creation. I also draw my mind to non-narrative video and non-linear narratives, projected still images, cinemagraphs. While there are exceptions to the rule, its general theory is one which is easy to understand – a photographic frame displays a fixed point in time, while video is constantly pushing forward in time, forcing the viewer onwards as they have no control over its motion. Both are associated with time, “the cinema with time in passing, the photograph with the lost moment.” (p4)
Digital film is criticised for being a polariser of opinion in photography and cinema. It served to generate two opinions. One that it disrupted photography’s unique relationship to reality, and the other that it was “a real revolution” (p3)
Sutton suggests that we still hang onto the “legacy” of “the decisive moment” (p7) even with the use of modern technology; however, what is more relevant is the “event.” (p10) We notice the event not by what it is, but its effect, it may be positive or negative, but if we do not notice an effect from it, we do not register its significance. By creating an image, we convert the truth into a single image which may represent the truth – it is this image which writes the history of the event and then causes us to remember it as the event, rather than the truth it represented.
As I am looking into using new, or at least unfamiliar technology it is interesting to see what Sutton says about its uptake. He discusses that it will rely on an aesthetic rather than the technology (p27) and that this aesthetic will be derived from the language of existing technologies. In creating a technologically advanced image it is important to not forget the codes and conventions which currently surround images, whether these are accepted or not by the author, they exist and are a part of the reading of our work.
“The photograph’s poverty in representing time is demonstrated through its apparent need to be attached to other frames in the filmstrip,” (p234)