What type of printing do you prefer?
I don’t have a preference for any particular material, although I believe that photographic printing on innovative materials is more easily adaptable to commercial uses. On the other hand, there are situations or projects that cannot ignore the use of materials, especially given the opportunities offered by new technologies.
What comes first, the idea or the fascination with the material? In other words, does the artistic/photographic project come first, or are you inspired by the techniques and particular processes that strike your attention?
For me, it’s impossible not to start from the idea. It’s clear that the material and the medium contribute significantly to the conceptual outcome, in terms of enhancing, explaining, and articulating the message, both rationally and emotionally.
Regarding the second part of the question, I would say no, but there is no doubt that by learning about or trying out printing on certain materials, ideas that were perhaps waiting to be developed, or simply stored away in memory, resurfaced as opportunities given by the performance of a particular print material.
Do you have any Masters you look up to and feel close to?
There are too many to list them all without forgetting some, can I start from 1300? 
Let’s say that to limit ourselves to photographers I would feel like mentioning, Nadar, Marey, Stieglitz and Steichen, Evans and closer Diane Arbus and Freelander, Wolf, Broadbent in Italy, certainly Basilico, and MV Corradi, I am very fascinated by the frankness of Guy Bordin…. Too many?
Observing her works, especially the portraits, so defined, with a seventeenth-century chromatic range and with so many aesthetic references to the history of art, I immediately thought of the video frames of Peter Greenaway and Bill Viola, so perfect in their composition as well as in the choice of colours and the portraits taken by Annie Leibovitz, who has always been able to characterise the subjects photographed, both by immortalising their gestures and through the creation of a set capable of enhancing their personal uniqueness.
Having mentioned Leibovitz, I cannot help but report this extract from the essay “On Photography” by Susan Sontag, which transcribes the following thought by Richard Avedon, another great portraitist:
“…I often think they come to me to be photographed the way they would go to a doctor or a fortune teller to find out what they are like. Therefore, they depend on me. I have to win them over, otherwise I have nothing to photograph. The concentration must come from me and involve them: sometimes its power is such that you can’t even hear the sounds, time stands still. We experience a brief, intense moment of intimacy, but it’s undeserved, it has no past or future, and when the pose is over—when the photograph is taken—there’s nothing left, except the photograph itself.”
Do you identify with this concept or do you consider it too nostalgic and melancholic?
We’ve known each other for such a short time, and he’s already discovered me! He’s cited artists whose vision has always fascinated me, but there are differences: Viola and Greenaway are on another planet, while I find Annie Leibovitz’s work technically superb, though less so conceptually. The seventeenth-century tone expresses a melancholy that is unique to me. The photography is static and silent, this is its strength. I use light and color, or contrast in black and white, combining them as if they were the musical timbre of a film soundtrack, but each time is an attempt; whether it’s successful, others will tell.
Future projects?
Tomorrow, tomorrow is another day, …
