Artistic work and research do not have to be determined by considerations about matter and technique. Physical reality and matter are limitations only for those who cannot perceive the world. In an era of electronic communications and virtual worlds, the quarrel about the nature of light - sent or received - or the palpable nature of matter is an 'arrière-garde' battle. Reality is not in our hands but in our brains and images are an intimate part of our reality, whatever their origin.
Painting on a background of stone or fabric, or on a screen, with colored dust, oil or pixels, are just ways of expressing artistic sensitivity throught out the ages. What remains essential is the existence in the artist's mind of a kind of 'gestaltic pre-figuration' of the world, which is the common seed - a sort of genetic code - of art works. Exploring the most diverse techniques corresponds to a natural evolution of the expression of human beings. And the integration of techniques, such as painting, video, photoscanning, holography, etc, just multiplies the array of the possibilities. A question remains however: does a simple technical manipulation - however pleasant - constitute an art-work ? I think that as far as the artist utilizes techniques to solve permanent painting problems such as composition, light choice or color games, we are going in the right direction.