I've never made any picture, good or bad, without paying for it in emotional turmoil.

I am an idealist. I often feel I would like to be an artist in an ivory tower. Yet it is imperative that I speak to people, so I must desert that ivory tower. To do this, I am a journalist - a photojournalist. But I am always torn between the attitude of the journalist, who is a recorder of facts, and the artist, who is often necessarily at odds with the facts. My principle concern is for honesty, above all honesty with myself.

The first word I would remove from the folklore of journalism is the word objective.

I try to take what voice I have and I give it to those who don’t have one at all.

Hardening of the categories causes art disease.

I am constantly torn between the attitude of the conscientious journalist who is a recorder and interpreter of the facts and of the creative artist who often is necessarily at poetic odds with the literal facts.

What use having a great depth of field, if there is not an adequate depth of feeling?