The contest between form and content is what, is what art is about - it's art history. That's what basically everybody has ever contended with. The problem is uniquely complex in still photography.

I have to photograph where I am.

I'm talking about technical goofs. I'm pretty much on top of it. The kind of picture you're referring to would have to be more about the effects of technical things, technical phenomena, and I'm just not interested in that kind of work at all.

You see something happening and you bang away at it. Either you get what you saw or you get something else--and whichever is better you print.

I don't care how they think of it. Some of these people are acquiring some very good pictures by a lot of different photographers.

There are people who are socially ambitious. If you go back aways, the Sculls, for instance, had a lot of money and they were socially ambitious. If you get an old master, it's not going to do you any good socially.

The photo is a thing in itself. And that's what still photography is all about.