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.

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.

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

The photograph as an objective representation of reality simply does not exist. The photograph does not explain to you what is going on to the left or to the right or above or below the frame. Oftentimes, it doesn't even explain to you what is going on inside the frame.

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

The digital tools allow us to have control over what and how we can alter an image that was unimaginable in the era of analog photography.