The people have to know what my portraits are like in order to behave in such a way that the result is one of my portraits.

I received my training at an art academy, so what I produce is art. That's what is artistic about my photographs.

Normally if you add information to information, you have more information. In case of my art, I destroy information, I would say, because the image is disturbed by the writings. In a way, they become pure imagery. For me it's really fun because it's an idealistic approach to images, to just play around with information and see what's happening.

If you look at photographers who say, "I hate digital photography," they all use Photoshop, even if it's to make the sky just a little more blue than it was. Manipulation is very discrete and because it's so discrete nobody cares about it anymore. People accept manipulated photographs, I think.

The people have to know what my portraits are like in order to behave in such a way that the result is one of my portraits.

If things are the way they are, why should I try to make them look different?

In photography, you always have both the medium and the depicted subject at the same time.