Edward Hopper Quotes

Photography seduces us into thinking we can believe photographs, whereas we can't really believe that a picture can tell us any kind of truth at all.

No matter what lens you use, no matter what speed the film, no matter how you develop it, no matter how you print it, you cannot say more than you can see.

The high-definition picture is still a perspective picture. That's the real problem, the perspective picture.

If a medium is representational by nature of the realistic image formed by a lens, I see no reason why we should stand on our heads to distort that function. On the contrary, we should take hold of that very quality, make use of it, and explore it to the fullest.

Photography sees surfaces, it doesn't see space. We see space but the camera doesn't.

What goes down on film is different to what you see with the naked eye.

In photography there is a reality so subtle that it becomes more real than reality.

I began to realise that film sees the world differently than the human eye, and that sometimes those differences can make a photograph more powerful than what you actually observed.

What I aspire to is to have the viewer look directly at the subject, as if they're looking through a window at the real thing.

I paint what I see, not what a camera would see.

Shadows sometimes people don't see shadows. The Chinese of course never paint them in pictures, oriental art never deals with shadow. But I noticed these shadows and I knew it meant it was sunny.

Height, width, and depth are the three phenomena which I must transfer into one plane to form the abstract surface of the picture, and thus to protect myself from the infinity of space.

I wanted to communicate what I had seen, so that others could see it.

Cubism is like standing at a certain point on a mountain and looking around. If you go higher, things will look different; if you go lower, again they will look different. It is a point of view.

My own eyes are no more than scouts on a preliminary search, for the camera's eye may entirely change my idea.

There is nothing as mysterious as a fact clearly described. I photograph to see what something will look like photographed.

If you watch fights cage-side, sometimes different punches look better than others. It's like camera angles. Sometimes some punches look a lot better than they were, and sometimes a solid punch doesn't look good. So it just depends on your angle.

I think the automation of vision is a much bigger deal than the invention of perspective.

The last change in our point of view gives the whole world a pictorial air.

I do not see eye to eye with the camera.

My aim is increasingly to make my photographs look so much like photographs [rather than paintings, etchings, etc.] that unless one has eyes and sees, they won't be seen - and still everyone will never forget having once looked at them.

I hate cameras. They interfere, they’re always in the way. I wish: if I could just work with my eyes alone. To get a satisfactory print, one that contains all that you intended, is very often more difficult and dangerous than the sitting itself. When I’m photographing, I immediately know when I’ve got the image I really want. But to get the image out of the camera and into the open, is another matter.

Somebody was saying to Picasso that he ought to make pictures of things the way they are-objective pictures. He mumbled that he wasn't quite sure what that would be. The person who was bullying him produced a photograph of his wife from his wallet and said, "There, you see, that is a picture of how she really is." Picasso looked at it and said, "She is rather small, isn't she? And flat?"

I should say that I am a visual person. I experience with my eyes and never, or rarely, with my ears... to my constant regret.

Size, perspective- large objects, when you make them too 3D, you dimensionalize them too much, they appear tiny, so you have to be careful about things like that.