Architectural Photography requires a lot of technique: the verticals of the building, both outdoors and indoors, must look vertical and, most importantly, the photographer cannot abstract himself from what he is photographing. That is, he cannot photograph something that looks like a hamburger if he is directing his camera at the bricks of a wall and the cement that joins them.

The (professional) obligation of a photographer specialized in Architecture is to reflect a construction and how it looks, how one lives in it, what I can do in that house if it belongs to me, if I am lucky enough to live in it.

A large room should appear large to the observer. A tiny bedroom must seem tiny.

I have photographed houses and apartments that are very ugly, horrible, without light inside, poorly distributed, alien to the essential perception of the human being in need of a comfortable place to live. And it is true that I have tried to squeeze out of them the little beauty they contain, without lying, of course.

This exercise makes you search, that you specialize in polishing until you find beauty in places where at first glance it does not exist. And that sometimes has repercussions on artistic exercises of great beauty. They are not fake. They do not contravene their nature. And they are beautiful.

Honestly, you can reflect the beauty of a ray of sunlight reflecting on a sparse brick, but that would be pure abstraction. An artistic Architectural Photography requires that an architectural element be seen and its effect on the people who observe it. An artistic Architectural Photography must suggest, and this is very important and very difficult, it must suggest something intense in each person who sees it. And, essential, that each person can see something different.

In essence, it is the definition of Art, that when observing a work, intense sensations arise that are closely related to the personal life of the person observing it.