Humans are accompanied throughout their life by an underlying fear, which is written within them. The fear that they are progressing towards a gradual decay that will lead to disappearance, into the unknown. This fear is not conscious, but it is there. The artist differs slightly from other people. He faces his fear. He is more aware of the fear. Because few things have answered this fear. Religion is one of them, art and, perhaps, love. Science hardly answers. Because science solves questions to reach another question. But if it answers someone, that is great happiness. Personally, art gives me the strength to see the world as sacred, as Pasolini said, who in one of his films mentioned that if one morning you wake up and see the world as something natural, if you see the sun, the sea, the sky as something natural, then everything has ended. Thus, this fear of existence can become a force of creation. Therefore, a person who sees everything in black is not likely to create or want to create. A person who sees everything rosy also has no reason to create. But one who feels the problem, the fear, the threat, and wants to respond to it, then has every reason to create and then creation is a triumphant response. This is also a reason why when Tarkovsky was once asked if his movie Stalker was a film of despair, he replied that if it is as you say, then it is not a work of art. Because a work of art is made because the artist has the need and the strength to respond to the basic existential fear. If we bring this to the measures of photography that often depicts, or tries to depict, misery, let's think that Winogrand had said that whatever the photograph depicts, it makes it wonderful and beautiful. Therefore, even when one uses misery as a subject, the response must be triumphantly positive.