Objectivity is impossible and it is also undesirable. That is, if it were possible it would be undesirable, because if you have any kind of a social aim, if you think history should serve society in some way; should serve the progress of the human race; should serve justice in some way, then it requires that you make your selection on the basis of what you think will advance causes of humanity.
It's just a matter of who you are and how you talk to people. Your subjects will trust you only if you're confident about what you're doing. It really bothers me when photographers first approach a subject without a camera, try to establish a personal relationship, and only then get out their cameras. It's deceptive. I think you should just show up with a camera, to make your intentions clear. People will either accept you or they won't.
People just like to be on camera. There's a huge desire to be in front of the camera, and once there, people will say and do almost anything. It's sort of a drug, and I think people get addicted to it.
I think the story should always determine the visual approach. There are situations where you want things to feel alive and like life, and there are situations that should have some magic and the separation with the grain.
Just having the camera, being able to pull back from situations and be an observer, it saved my life... I realised I could find these intimate moments and that people trusted me. That, basically, my camera was magic.
I have a lot of appreciation for what people do in front of the camera as well as behind the camera. I don't think I could like one without the other. Eventually, I think the road will lead me down to producing or directing, because it's more about problem solving.
I made advances towards multiple women in work-related situations, where it was clearly inappropriate. I put people in compromising and inappropriate situations, and I selfishly took advantage of those situations where I should have known better. My behavior was inexcusable and wrong.
There is nothing worse than when actors come to a set - and it happens a lot with big stars - and they are too aware of where the camera is. They are the show. And that becomes apparent and it affects the production. I am like 'You should not know where the camera is - you should act, and I will do the rest.'
Some people serve with pride - because they 'want to' do and be their best; other people serve with disdain because they 'have to' do their job. Which person do you think will end up running the show?
In the end, money should serve something greater than just money. It should serve you, your family, the people you want to touch.
I don't believe in data-driven anything, it's the most stupid phrase. Data should always serve people, people should never serve data.
We come to love those we serve. If we choose to begin to serve the Master out of even a glimmer of faith, we will begin to know Him. We will come to know His purposes for the people we serve for Him. Even when they do not accept our offer to serve them, we will feel His appreciation if we persist.
I think a comedian has to be low status on some level; that gives you the right to do all sorts of jokes about all sorts of different kinds of people.
It takes a lot of work to do this every day, every day, but I feel, as a sheriff, I should get to know my people. I serve them. They don't serve me. I serve them. They're my bosses, and the more people I can see and talk to, I love it.
I think having a great range of experiences in my life had helped me as a writer, particularly a writer of fiction. I have known a great many different sorts of people in different situations, and I have a notion how very well of badly people can behave in times of stress or danger or violence.
I saw that the camera could be a weapon against poverty, against racism, against all sorts of social wrongs. I knew at that point I had to have a camera.