Now, to consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravity before going for a walk.

Now one does not think during creative work: any more than one thinks when driving a car. One has a background of years — learning — unlearning— success — failure — dreaming — thinking — experience — back it goes — farther back than one's ancestors: all this, — then the moment of creation, the focussing of all into the moment. So I can make — "without thought" — fifteen carefully-considered negatives one every fifteen minutes, — given material with as many possibilities.

It seems so utterly naive that landscape - not that of the pictorial school - is not considered of "social significance" when it has a far more important bearing on the human race of a given locale than excrescences called cities.

An excellent conception can be quite obscured by faulty technical execution or clarified by faultless technique.

Why limit yourself to what your eyes see when you have an opportunity to extend your vision?

People who wouldn't think of taking a sieve to the well to draw water fail to see the folly in taking a camera to make a painting.

It's hard not to tell the truth with a camera. Artists are particularly good at that.