RaMell Ross

It's anthropological. Perfect. Yeah. Yeah. I think in terms of the way that photography and film present a truth that is perspectival but presents itself as unauthored often just by fact of it. not being clearly from someone's point of view has always been the problem.

Because from an anthropological perspective, when you go to a place and you make something from your point of view and you present it as science, it just reads as factual. And that's why we believe certain things about certain places. It replaces that perception. And so to make the camera an organ, to me, is a strategy to ensure that the person encountering the work

Because from an anthropological perspective, when you go to a place and you make something from your point of view and you present it as science, it just reads as factual. And that's why we believe certain things about certain places. It replaces that perception. And so to make the camera an organ, to me, is a strategy to ensure that the person encountering the work

Because from an anthropological perspective, when you go to a place and you make something from your point of view and you present it as science, it just reads as factual. And that's why we believe certain things about certain places. It replaces that perception. And so to make the camera an organ, to me, is a strategy to ensure that the person encountering the work

Knows that it's author, that it's subjective.

Knows that it's author, that it's subjective.

Knows that it's author, that it's subjective.

Yeah, I think it's what wasn't on the page. I think reading Colson Whitehead's Nickel Boys, my first thought is, like, what's the world look like then, you know?

Yeah, I think it's what wasn't on the page. I think reading Colson Whitehead's Nickel Boys, my first thought is, like, what's the world look like then, you know?

Yeah, I think it's what wasn't on the page. I think reading Colson Whitehead's Nickel Boys, my first thought is, like, what's the world look like then, you know?

In the 1960s. And I say that with, like, an armchair philosophical undertone in that I like to think about... We don't know what the world looked like specifically from our lens now. The world that we see is not the world that they felt. It's the world that we think we know from our future position. I look at that, I read the book and I'm like, What would I photograph then? What would I see?

In the 1960s. And I say that with, like, an armchair philosophical undertone in that I like to think about... We don't know what the world looked like specifically from our lens now. The world that we see is not the world that they felt. It's the world that we think we know from our future position. I look at that, I read the book and I'm like, What would I photograph then? What would I see?

In the 1960s. And I say that with, like, an armchair philosophical undertone in that I like to think about... We don't know what the world looked like specifically from our lens now. The world that we see is not the world that they felt. It's the world that we think we know from our future position. I look at that, I read the book and I'm like, What would I photograph then? What would I see?

Like, what would I feel? A person who's grown up with the privileges that I have and leans towards a poetic exploration of the visual field and society. I think one of the challenges of the adaption is the adaption itself. You know? Like, how do you do that? And...

Like, what would I feel? A person who's grown up with the privileges that I have and leans towards a poetic exploration of the visual field and society. I think one of the challenges of the adaption is the adaption itself. You know? Like, how do you do that? And...

Like, what would I feel? A person who's grown up with the privileges that I have and leans towards a poetic exploration of the visual field and society. I think one of the challenges of the adaption is the adaption itself. You know? Like, how do you do that? And...

You want to take liberties that lean into your strengths, but you don't want to take liberties that undermine, at least from my perspective, because Coulson's work is rooted in truth, and it does have this mythology that is almost biblical in the way in which it's trying to get to the, through archetypes, it's trying to get to some sort of deeper fact. You don't want to stray too far.

You want to take liberties that lean into your strengths, but you don't want to take liberties that undermine, at least from my perspective, because Coulson's work is rooted in truth, and it does have this mythology that is almost biblical in the way in which it's trying to get to the, through archetypes, it's trying to get to some sort of deeper fact. You don't want to stray too far.

You want to take liberties that lean into your strengths, but you don't want to take liberties that undermine, at least from my perspective, because Coulson's work is rooted in truth, and it does have this mythology that is almost biblical in the way in which it's trying to get to the, through archetypes, it's trying to get to some sort of deeper fact. You don't want to stray too far.

The idea of the images popping up is kind of how we're dealing... We deal with images, I think, in our own head. Like, when we see something, there's an association that happens. And it flexes or accents some sort of visual thing we've encountered in the past. It helps us read that thing. And then we're off to the races. But also, in the context of the film, I think it allows the viewer...