I am a former economist. I never went to photography school to learn photography.

I can be an artist a posteriori, not a priori. If my pictures tell the story, our story, human story, then in a hundred years, then they can be considered an art reference, but now they are not made as art. I'm a journalist. My life's on the road, my studio is the planet.

What I want is to create a discussion about what is happening around the world and to provoke some debate with these pictures. Nothing more than this.

Most of the information we now get is through television and is mutilated. Photography offers the opportunity to spend much more time on a topic. It's relatively cheaper medium, and can allow a photographer really to live in another place, show another reality, get closer to the truth.

For me, art is such a wide concept - anything can be art.

I'm not a religious person. The language of photography is symbolic.

I have two children. I have a Down syndrome child whom I love very much, and my wife that I love.