Was 'the man in charge', when he used the word 'conservancy' (is that like 'sustainability'?), talking about the subjects in the photographs or the photographic objects themselves? I'm still not clear on that, and maybe he wasn't himself. And your post suggests that you weren't and the replies, including mine, suggest we aren't clear either. The whole thing is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Which is fun.
But let's just assume that 'the man in charge' was simply an ignorant mouthpiece. Very likely.
I was miffed and disappointed with that rat's hasty 'arrogance'.
Both accuracy and aesthetics are illusions. Unfortunately, because the literal minded can't grasp aesthetics, they become preoccupied with accuracy, which has plenty of 'scientific' literature in photography. But... you can't help talking about realism in connection with photographic accuracy (as you have David), thus, it's really a question for philosophers. I used the term in another thread; digging for Australia.But, now, with those factors seemingly contradicting one another (accuracy vs aesthetics) I really wonder if desertratt was really both prompt and prescient.