The idea behind my work has a visionary nature. I believe that my love for photography lies in its illusory essence.
Photography, in a paradoxical way, always shows us a plausible world but, in fact, is just a virtual and allegorical world, more similar to Plato's myth of cave than to objective reality.
I am not interested to the representation of nature while I find stimulating to investigate the human nature which becomes the core of my research even when the human figure does not clearly appear.
I have also a deep respect for the technique, the picture composition always tends to follow the aesthetic rules of figurative art, often through the use of metaphor.
Photography technique although is used in a pure and direct way by avoiding retouch and photomontage, and it is pushed to the extreme through the use of exasperated exposure times, of primitive lenses, and by forcing treatments of the various materials.
Since 2003 I started exploring new media, focusing mainly on motion picture, video. What I said for photography applies to video as well, even if the human presence is usually expressed in a inderect way.
Light gives shape and colour to objects and actions.
I call as plastic whatever produces a shadow.
Light gives things a visible shape.
Light has no sense if there is nothing to be lighted up.
The truth that the light shows it is explained through the shadows that the light produces.
The truth that the light demonstrates has only a dark point: its shadow.
The visible world is the plastic group shown by the light.
A point is the unit of each image, a circle which diameter tends to zero. A point is the beginning of any picture, it is the moment when the pen meets the paper, or when the silver begins the photographic process.
Every elementary picture is a methodical combination of points.
Every elementary picture creates a connection with a single object.
Every complex picture is a composition of more objects.
The relationship between objects creates a state of objects.
In a state of objects each object is a variable.
The whole group of states of objects in a visual perception composes the visual world.
Every picture represents only a portion of the state of objects, it is a detail of the visual world.
Figurative art represents a logical function between the faculty of seeing and the visible world.
What the pictures shows (the object itself) does not belong to the figurative language.
The object is a portion of the visible world and it is extraneous to the picture itself.
Every depiction is a function like f (x), where f is the application (photography, painting, etc.), and x, y, z are the variables or the meta-variables (the objects, or the shown elements).
Photography is a function that shows states of objects through a photographic process.
The photographic function generates a photographic proposition: the picture.
The picture is contingent to the visible world if it is true for at least one variable x of the f (x) function.
The picture is contingent to the visible world if it shows a real part of the visible world.
The elements (x, y, z) represent the true possibilities of the photographic function.
For a picture to be true, it must exist at least a variable x so that the open function f (x) is satisfied.
The state of objects shown in a picture is an image group of the visible world.
A priori a picture can be neither true, nor false. A priori I can not assign any truth value to the variables x, y and z.
Only when the function is resolved, it is possible to assign a truth value.
Since the objects that the picture shows are extraneous to the picture itself, the picture is neither true or false.
To assign a truth value I need to know beforehand the original object shown into the picture.
So the picture can only be a proposition, it can only be contingent.
I am not allowed to know whether a picture is true or false - I assume it is true whenever it appears to be credible.
This is an empirical solution of the function: I was not there when the picture was shot. What the picture shows
is the past: I cannot verify that at all. I can only either believe or not to what a photographic picture shows.
The paradox that lies in a photographic picture is generated by its credibility.
The paradox of photography is generated by its plausibility, its verisimilitude with the visual world, verisimilitude that is accepted in faith to its photo-mechanics essence.