Critique / Discussions

People have always tried to classify photographs. The motivations for this are varied but are generally aimed at helping critics in evaluating photographs. Historian Beaumont Newhall had divided photographs into four categories: straight, formalistic, documentary and equivalent. Stieglitz, Adams are examples of those photographers employing the straight approach. Man Ray, Moholy-Nagy are considered of the formalistic style. Documentary is concerned with recording the object without intrusion. Its purpose is to inform. Photojournalism falls in this category. Equivalent photography is used to refer to photographic metaphors "charged with emotional significance and inner meaning".
This classification has evolved and new categories have made their appearance. Critics now have devised six categories: descriptive, explanatory, interpretive, ethically evaluative, aesthetically evaluative, and theoretical. Those categories are not meant to pigeonhole photographers but are a means to classify photographs. It is important to note that a photograph may fall in more than one category. However, there is generally one dominant category in which a photograph fits. The role of the critic is to find this/these categories.
Descriptive photographs aim at providing visual information which describe the object. Such photographs include medical photographs, surveillance photos, and the like. The photogrpaher attempts at accurately recording the subject matter.
Explanatory photographs are used to explain the subject matter: how things are. Sociologists, anthropologists, and other scientists often use photographs to record and explain certain situations. For example, Muybridge's photographs which captured the movement of the horse to decide whether or not its four legs can be in the air at the same time fall in this category of explanatory photographs.
Like explanatory photographs, interpretive photographs also aim at explaining how things are but do not emphasize scientific accuracy. They are personal and necessarily subjective interpretations. Emmet Gowin, Sally Mann, Sandy Skoglund are examples. Photo-transformations and highly manipulated photographs also fit in this category such as Jerry Uelsmann's and his wife Maggie Taylor.
Ethically evaluative photographs make ethical judgments. They comment, either praise or condemn aspects of society. They are politically engaged.
Aesthetically evaluative photographs also make judgments but their subject matter are not social issues. Their concern is judgment on the aesthetic value of the subject matter and a a judgment as to the worth of aesthetic observation and evaluation. Nudes, still life, landscape are examples of such photographs.
Theoretical photographs are photographs about photography. Photographs in this category comment on issues relating to art and art making, politics of art, modes of representation etc...Much of conceptual art and conceptual photography fits in this category--Cindy Sherman's work is an example of such photographs.

My comment:

Categorization, I suppose can be beneficial but can also be detrimental. It is beneficial in the sense that it sets a common language and common understanding among critics and those interested in photography. It could be detrimental if it is used to pigeonhole the photographer. It is important to realize that photographers can and generally do produce works that span different categories.
The above is a summary of a chapter from a book I am currently reading Criticizing Photographs by Terry Barrett. It is a very good book and I highly recommend it for anyone interested in critique and in looking at photographs in an evaluative way. I hope that you found this useful.