The (photographic) negative is the equivalent of the composers score and the print is the equivalent of the conductors performance.

I have often thought that if photography were difficult in the true sense of the term - meaning that the creation of a simple photograph would entail as much time and effort as the production of a good watercolor or etching - there would be a vast improvement in total output. The sheer ease with which we can produce a superficial image often leads to creative disaster.

One of the most important pieces of equipment, for the photographer who really wants to improve, is a great big wastepaper basket.

The negative is comparable to the composer's score and the print to its performance. Each performance differs in subtle ways.

The disciples are drawn to the high altars with magnetic certainty, knowing that a great Presence hovers over the ranges ... You were within the portals of the temple ... to enter the wilderness and seek, in the primal patterns of nature, a magical union with beauty.

I can't verbalize the internal meaning of pictures whatsoever. Some of my friends can at very mystical levels, but I prefer to say that, if I feel something strongly, I would make a photograph, that would be the equivalent of what I saw and felt.

I do not think there is any question of photography being an art form!