I take no shame in it. Lots of people do it now. This is not a spurning of the Ruskinian 'truth to materials'. There is nothing wrong in pumping up the colours in a photograph. I protested a lot there. Maybe there is something wrong with it. Not everything, but I do feel as if I am breaking some kind of code when I go past a certain point. Which is ridiculous. Colour is a relativistic experience at best. Ancient Greeks argued about it, or simply pointed out the wierd nature of a colour: you can't describe it. So, even if colour is not a complete invention, it has some of the qualities of invention. And I say this because I didn't look at the scene and see what I see above. In the original act of looking I saw shape and light and shade, mostly. It was that central rectangle gap that I was looking at, seeing through to another stack of stone ten feet beyond. Lichen, shadow, sunlight, dead leaves, and the flat surfaces of cleaved rock.

After putting the photographs together I pootered with the corners and then passed it through a few pieces of software to enhance it, to bring out that raised ... colour, tone, relief, contrast. What have you. I was concerned there wasn't enough to look at. And now it looks like those microscope pictures of hugely magnified things we tend to eat and wallow in without noticing.

I am sure there is some moral in it.