Quote Originally Posted by tim atherton
photographic art can only consist of individual images? (presumably each piece on their own expanse of blank white wall?). I must have missed that rule somewhere?

are you talking about "art to match your sofa"
This is a tangential issue here, but the strict answer is "Yes." If you're going to present work as single images in frames on a white wall, of course they've got to stand up on their own. This of course presupposes a definition of art as "images saleable in a gallery." Photojournalism, as I and others have remarked, is a different ball game, or at least was in the days when there were magazines that published photo-essays - these need a narrative, a flow, a beginning, middle and end, and are very likely to consist of images which work in context but do not all have (perhaps none have) a "blow your socks off" impact. Images of this kind have not conventionally been given the label "art," today it is more likely that this will happen, since with the demise of the big picture magazines, photo-essays if done at all are most likely to appear as books, exhibition catalogs and exhibitions themselves and to be sold in at least the first two of these forms.