TPL: You do not consider yourself a photographer but an interpreter of photography? Can you explain what you mean?
EC: In the beginning, photography was just a simple hobby for me, I didn't pose any questions, I just took pictures because I liked what I saw and it attracted my attention. As time went by, this hobby turned into something more important that stimulated me to go deeper. I felt the need to fill my gaps in photographic technique, but even after this study I was still dissatisfied. I didn't feel the photos I took were mine, I perceived them as anonymous, cold images, far from me without a personal identification. By reading books on photography I decided to study chromaticism and how to interpret it differently in photography. In one of them, a book by one of the great masters of Italian photography, Luigi Ghirri, the author described what photography was for him. He said, "Photography is not pure duplication or a chronometer of the eye that stops the physical world, but it is also a language in which the difference between reproduction and interpretation, no matter how subtle, exists and gives rise to an infinity of imaginary worlds."
It was revelatory for me, it was the answer to my continuous dissatisfaction, his thought gave me the way to understand that photography has different languages. Taking a picture is not only to freeze forever a moment, but in it we have the possibility to transfer any emotion, feeling, or mood, artistically reinterpreting that moment with our own sensitivity and making it unique, so it will never be just a photograph as an end in itself.