7
tograph mechanically. Whether the product of my work is considered ‘art’
is solely the decision of the viewer. No one else has the right to determine
what art is except the viewers in their entirety. I don’t believe any artistic
technique is ‘art’ on principle.
I deliberately do not limit the editions of my photographic works,
because I feel it is counterproductive to artificially limit the edition of an
easily reproducible photograph just so someone will pay more for
sharing the joy of my photographic work with as few other people as pos-
sible. This does not correspond to the true process of modern picture
production, nor is it in the democratic spirit of photography. In principle,
I do not want to limit the circle of viewers who appreciate my pictures; on
the contrary, I expressly want to enlarge this circle. I am a true product
and enthusiastic adherent of the age of reproduction. Without reproduc-
tion, all of us would not be what we are today. If I were the one to decide,
all limiting of editions would be abolished. Photographers such as Ansel
Adams, Caponigro, Cartier-Bresson or Pentii Sammallahti have resisted
the market’s propensity to limit editions and have sold well nevertheless.
Often the buyer of a limited photograph deceives himself, in particular
when the volume of sold photographs is far less than the limitation of the
edition. This is not a rare occurrence and should give cause for thought. I
like to work with the most modern technology available. Digital photo-
graphy has opened up possibilities for photography which previously
were simply inconceivable. Moreover, digital photography has a neutral
effect on the environment, as do the pigment printing processes which I
exclusively use.
NL - In your series
Pictures and Signs
it is quite apparent that you play
with artistic references.What impact have artistic movements – and
also artists, musicians and men of letters or even scientists – had on
your photographic work?
WL
– I often don’t know right away whether I’ve been influenced by the
work of a well-known artist, but sometimes I do discover this much later:
In my first attempts as a photographer I was very much influenced by
Cartier-Bresson, and I think this can be seen in my series People Today.
That doesn’t mean I wanted to photograph exactly like Cartier-Bresson
did. In a certain way he sees man in the culmination of a course of
events. Someone once said that Cartier-Bresson had the mentality of an
archer. I hold that to be a good description of the phenomenon of
Cartier-Bresson. According to my idea of photographing people, a course
of events should neither be strikingly emphasised nor avoided. I strive to
photograph people in the ‘dignity of the moment’ – not posed, but
nevertheless as if for a painting. In doing so, I definitely want to avoid
fixating as permanent anything incidental, thoughtless or momentary in
the photographic image. That is why I feel a great aversion towards what
is known as ‘close-to-life photography’.
From Ernst Haas, the ingenious Austrian photographer, I learned how to
work in large cycles. His book The Creation was the second photography
book I ever owned and I’ve always held it in high esteem. Haas was some-
thing of a virtuoso of colour photography with the 35 mm camera. He
could do everything, and he always did it a little bit better than every-
body else. That is a good basis for great achievements – especially in pho-
