Camera/Action

"Performance art and photography are radically different mediums, but both define a non-ordinary space by imposing parameters on it — a space that depends on the viewer to make it come alive."

Traditional performance from a conceptual point of view has a lot to do with immediacy and the view of an action in the present moment. Some artist's take this credo and with it denounce the authenticity of the camera as it relates to the documentation of a performance. Artists like Allan Kaprow were outspoken about their unfavorable opinion of the photograph in art as they thought it took away from the beauty and concept behind the live performance. These antagonists did not like how the camera forced parameters on a performance or action by its frame and capturing of only one moment to describe and entire work.
This school of thought was challenged however by the 60's and 70's when artists began to rely on film to document their work and spread their ideas to larger audiences. The question then asked why film was not significant, when art came after the experience in the first place. The camera gained credibility as it started being used as a part of the performance by artists such as Ma Liuming and Marina Abromovic. Tehching Hsieh used the camera as evidence of his extreme works of endurance which often counted on documentation to prove his work credible.
I think that the use of the camera is at the artists discretion. I believe it can be an awesome medium, but it can also distort the work. Use of the camera should be specific and well thought out but never taken out of context.
This link will take you to a site where the camera is used for documentation and actually frames graffiti as art.
http://www.picturesofwalls.com/