Hey Ken,

You're exactly right when you say it is a broad term. Therefore such narrow definitions are simply incorrect.

They can have different opinions, but opinions are simply often incorrect, they can have that opinion as long as they realise it's completely incorrect factually and don't try to spread this opinion to other people (misinformation).

I was presenting factual information as opposed to opinion or belief. If people want to present dramatically incorrect definitions of well-defined terms, then they had better be prepared for people to point it out to them every single time they mention it.

"As far as can be ascertained, it was Sir John Herschel in a lecture before the Royal Society of London, on March 14, 1839 who made the word "photography" known to the whole world. But in an article published on February 25 of the same year in a german newspaper called the Vossische Zeitung, Johann von Maedler, a Berlin astronomer, used the word photography already. The word photography is based on the Greek φῶς (photos) "light" and γραφή (graphé) "representation by means of lines" or "drawing", together meaning "drawing with light"."

(And in modern terms it is the same thing but with photons or EMR to encompass the non-visible spectrums used for both science/R&D and creative photographers alike).


Saying that x using y methods and materials and tools is photography, as a inclusive statement is correct, it is inclusive of that into what photography is.

Saying the same thing in an exclusive statement is completely incorrect, there is simply no wriggle room for personal preference there. Anything specific or narrow in an exclusive statement referring to what photography is, is simply incorrect by definition.