"(...) So, receiving a latent image is an invitation to creativity (shared creativity or as you like, "interactive" creativity). At the individual level, there are unlimited options with regard to these latent images. They can be kept as they are in a state of permanent latency, with all their promises and secrets intact. Or they can be developed by a standad procedure to satisfy one's curiosity. They can be developed heterodoxically, by modifying the habitual norms and introducing experimental variations. They can be dyed or coloured, drawm or written on. They can be made into pieces to create a collage. Or they can be put into the microwave oven. Or we can burn them and take pictures of their ashes. Or they can be covered with photographic emulsion so that another latent image can be exposed on them. Or...

We have entered an unending process, a manifold project that impinges upon many creative aspects and does not make a final statement about the much-trumpeted "death of the author". Let us realise that, here, the images, whether they be latent or visible are contingent as "works", traps an riddles presented to the viewers, whether or not they are participants. Theoretically the reason beind Photolatente has to be found in the elaboration of the process itself, which generates images and questions. In any case, then, the work is the process itself and the resulting images ar sheer accidents. What about the author? The author is in charge, by controlling, making the rules and watching over the procedure, even though as in this particular case, he might allow us a certain degree of participation because we are necessary as actors in this conceptual contraption he has created. Our inevitable, fascinated confusion is a requisite of his game -his work. (...)"

© Joan Fontcuberta, 2002
Complete text of editorial disposable in: www.photovision.es