W. Eugene Smith quotes:

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

Never have I found the limits of the photographic potential. Every horizon, upon being reached, reveals another beckoning in the distance. Always, I am on the threshold.

Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.

Passion is in all great searches and is necessary to all creative endeavors.

With considerable soul searching, that to the utmost of my ability, I have let truth be the prejudice.

The world just does not fit conveniently into the format of a 35mm camera.

I think photojournalism is documentary photography with a purpose.

Available light is any damn light that is available!

Hardening of the categories causes art disease.

If I can get them to think, get them to feel, get them to see, then I've done about all that I can as a teacher.

Negatives are the notebooks, the jottings, the false starts, the whims, the poor drafts, and the good draft but never the completed version of the work The print and a proper one is the only completed photograph, whether it is specifically shaded for reproduction, or for a museum wall.

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

I would that my photographs might be, not the coverage of a news event, but an indictment of war - the brutal corrupting viciousness of its doing to the minds and bodies of men; and, that my photographs might be a powerful emotional catalyst to the reasoning which would help this vile and criminal stupidity from beginning again.

... to became neighbours and friends instead of journalists. This is the way to make your finest photographs.

...and each time I pressed the shutter release it was a shouted condemnation hurled with the hope that the picture might survive through the years, with the hope that they might echo through the minds of men in the future - causing them caution and remembrance and realization.

An artist must be ruthlessly selfish.

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.

I can't stand these damn shows on museum walls with neat little frames, where you look at the images as if they were pieces of art. I want them to be pieces of life!

I didn't write the rules. Why would I follow them?

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

I would that my photographs might be, not the coverage of a news event, but an indictment of war.

In music I still prefer the minor key, and in printing I like the light coming from the dark. I like pictures that surmount the darkness, and many of my photographs are that way. It is the way I see photographically. For practical reasons, I think it looks better in print too.

Many claim I am a photographer of tragedy. In the greater sense I am not, for though I often photograph where the tragic emotion is present, the result is almost invariably affirmative.

Most photographers seem to operate with a pane of glass between themselves and their subjects. They just can't get inside and know the subject.

My camera, my intentions stopped no man from falling. Nor did they aid him after he had fallen. It could be said that photographs be damned for they bind no wounds. Yet, I reasoned, if my photographs could cause compassionate horror within the viewer, they might also prod the conscience of that viewer into taking action.

My photographs at best hold only a small length, but through them I would suggest and criticize and illuminate and try to give compassionate understanding.

My pictures are complex and so am I.

The purpose of all art is to cause a deep and emotion, also one that is entertaining or pleasing. Out of the depth and entertainment comes value.

Up to and including the moment of exposure, the photographer is working in an undeniably subjective way. By his choice of technical approach, by the selection of the subject matterand by his decision as to the exact cinematic instant of exposure, he is blending the variables of interpretation into an emotional whole.

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

What's the best type of light? Why that would be available light... and by available light I mean any damn light is available.

You can't photograph if you're not in love.