Art is based on order. The world is full of 'sloppy Bohemians' and their work betrays them.

The camera sees more than the eye, so why not make use of it?

I don't care if you make a print on a bath mat, just as long as it is a good print.

To see the Thing itself is essential: the quintessence revealed direct without the fog of impressionism... This then: to photograph a rock, have it look like a rock, but be more than a rock. Significant presentation - not interpretation.

My true program is summed up in one word: life. I expect to photograph anything suggested by that word which appeals to me.

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.

I see no reason for recording the obvious.