Does one really need to explain one’s photography or shouldn’t you just let the pictures speak for themselves, or not? But there seems an odd mix of documentary and landscape in what I do.
Long before I owned a camera I had appreciated photography and moving to London had made it easy to see shows featuring the war photo-journalist Don McCullin, Chris Killip, Martin Parr, Sebastaio Salgado and others. Brian Harris‘s work in the early Independent newspaper particularly impressed me too. These may led me to pursue long term documentary projects like Speakers Corner, and to working mainly in black and white, and there’s an obvious connection from my admiration for McCullin to my interest in historical re-enactment. But this project also came from having read history at Cambridge, and I was also a big fan of Robert Mapplethorpe, yet studio photography in general has always left me cold. So maybe my photography is more about hunting or finding images rather than constructing them?