“I have always associated such delayed actions [retardement]with the experience of the photographer. Not with photography but with the photographic experience of an “image hunter”. Before the snapshot or instamatic [instantané] that, from the lens or objective, freezes for near eternity what is naively called an image, there would thus be this delayed action…this delayed action always gets woven within me along the lines of two Athenian threads: photography (the writing of light–is there a word more Greek?) and the enigmatic thought of the aiōn…an incessant space of time…The intriguing possibility of a delayed action gets woven or plotted out in advance along the lines of these threads. Incessantly.” Derrida, Athens, Still Remains. 17-19.
A slight cop-out to respond to Adam’s provocative thoughts on ontological connections between the process of cinema and “reception” with a snap-shot of Derrida’s receptions of snap-shots of Athens and snap-shots of Socrates. But this incessant cop-out-snap-shot-delay of a quote re-emphasizes how “reception” seizes, like a snap-shot, a writing-of-light which incessantly replots, re-burns, its place. A shot in the dark?
More burning, does this language of photographic technologies risk at a violence of abstraction; a “head-shot” beheaded? Maybe the negatives of reception and photography double expose each other.
“An important principle of exposure is reciprocity.” (Wikipedia “Exposure (Photography”)
Photographic reciprocity names a relationship between light and time; the intensity and duration of light, and the reactions with/on sensitive materials.