Just a few points to bring up as food for thought (without having a specific point in particular):
1. "the camera can never truly capture (a) something as seen (b)".
a) because the tool writes itself on the work. This is inescapable. Now knowing that...what do 'we' do? Perhaps nothing needs to be done, other than just recognizing it and moving on to do whatever we're going to do anyway. But to know it in the 21st century is important, I feel.
b) your see-ing is not as objective as you take for granted (as any modern [western, rational, visual-centered culture] person takes for granted). An example of this is how perspective drawing was 'invented' in the 14th century (?). Notably by an architect, and I suspect this was fostered by the presence of open plazas in Italy at the time. What I'm saying is the way you see things has a lot to do with culture. The "magical realism" of Colombian art is no less "real"...to them.
2) An intentional veneration of my subject (a), with the aim of being as representational (b) as possible.
a) subject - the thing separate from you. Out there. In the 'dead world' which may be dissected and whose secrets will then be known to man. Comes from proto-scientist monks.......or something. I bring this up because animism isn't something that is considered, in the main, or other philosophies (conceptual frameworks) that very much have a bearing on what/how we see.
b) representational - if it is unchanging, if your tools are neutral, if your faculties of perception were neutral, if you ignore (or are unable to perceive) it's changing. I guess it might be useful--if one wanted to know what really mattered to themselves with regard to their own attitudes about representation--to engage in the exercise of 'capturing' water or fire. Or, again, maybe it doesn't matter and we go on to do what we do anyway.....just with the knowledge that we only choose to represent objects that aren't moving too fast
Also to consider: representational of what? Yes, usually that means paying attention to visual parameters...and only from one point of view (again, invented in the 1400s where the individual was as an important idea as it is today)
3) But loosening (a) up requires me to find (b) a different relationship between artist/subject/audience (c)
a) loosening up is great
b) the relationship happens as a consequence of the change. "The young package their messages in media that fit their messages. In so doing, they create their own audiences.......The point was that they would reach the right people in the right way with the right message" (Edmund Carpenter). << seems super relevant on a forum like this with all you young folk
c) disregard audience. To Rod and I nothing is more useless than imagining what an imaginary set of people might think generally.