I have always questioned everything: education, the obligation to memorize, authority. Perhaps that is why I have photographed everything.

I always found it rather pathetic that as a photographer I would be dependent to such a large extent on sheer luck... So the moment I was offered [digital] tools to bend the shape of the image into my choices, and not those of lady luck, I was hooked.

Before, the myth of photography doesn't lie was used in order to cover up tricks. If I [make a] portrait [of] you, accommodate you, illuminate you, put make up on you or use a filter, am I not manipulating reality? The only difference is that now I can do it from the computer in the postclick instead of the preclick. If I decide to photograph something instead of something else, I also manipulate reality. Of course a photograph can lie or commit abuse, but it always could.

[Photography] is the non-complacence of the eye. To practice my right to look is also a critical attitude. If I stare at you, I will make you uncomfortable, and culturally we have a difficulty of staring and being stared at.

At certain moments of intense personal grief, capturing images was for me the only way to comprehend later what was happening.

I have always questioned everything: education, the obligation to memorize, authority. Perhaps that is why I have photographed everything.

Merging photographs can be more real than the isolated image because reality is so much more rich than just an isolated moment.