There's no reason you'd shoot Mother Theresa and Newt Gingrich the same way.

Magazines don't have enough confidence to have their own style, so they use a borrowed style. That is shocking to me, but your perception is very accurate. It's a way to be more commercially viable, but to me, that's not having a style, that's having a schtick.

The picture I was hoping for is never the picture I get, but yeah, I think they fail all the time. Fortunately my clients don't think they do, so I can continue to have a career. But I just look at them and think.

To me, style is like your fingerprint. Nobody else has it.

The last thing people want is a surprise, these days.

A photographer is responsible for creating a climate in which they can do their best work.

My brother used to say some people have an inferiority simplex. It's not that they're under the delusion that they're inferior they actually are inferior and they secretly know it.

Normally I do all my own post work. It's not that I do it better than anyone else, I just do it my way. I make decisions. People who print at labs are probably far better printers, but they won't make my decisions mid-process. I don't want to be out of the loop. I want to be a photographer and do all of it.

I was shooting lots of large format portraits then but I've since changed to digital, where you have so much more control. There are millions of things you can do with digital you can be more spontaneous, and you're more in control of your color palette.

I wanted to grow in terms of making pictures, not adapting to new software and technology. But that's the game now.

People aren't hiring just a picture, they're hiring someone they can work with. That plays a big role .

I never do pictures that I've done before - but I really try not to. Whenever I get an assignment I try to think how to shoot this person for this story in this magazine at this point in time.