Magazines don't have enough confidence to have their own style, so they use a borrowed style. That is shocking to me, but your perception is very accurate. It's a way to be more commercially viable, but to me, that's not having a style, that's having a schtick.

The work is primarily subject-driven. All decisions flow from there. The photographs are all made in response to a unique subject, in particular context, at a specific moment in time. The thoughtful preparedness that defines my working method actually facilitates spontaneity and allows me to embrace surprise. I always have a game plan but view it as merely the jumping off point.

I was shooting lots of large format portraits then but I've since changed to digital, where you have so much more control. There are millions of things you can do with digital; you can be more spontaneous, and you're more in control of your color palette.

A photographer is responsible for creating a climate in which they can do their best work.

There are a lot of decisions to make, creatively. Now, with digital, you can really be the author of your own work. From the beginning to the end of the process, you control everything.

Digital held no romance for me at all. I hated it. I miss my big cameras. The working process, I miss it.

I never do pictures that I've done before - but I really try not to. Whenever I get an assignment I try to think how to shoot this person for this story in this magazine at this point in time.