A recent response to a post made me think about the definitions of photography and art and to consider how these 2 entities should be defined with respect to each other. I have proposed 2 separate Venn Diagrams as possibilities (see Figures 1 and 2 attached). Both possibilities consider that there is art which is not photography and photography which is also art. By no reasonable definition could it be considered otherwise. To be specific, it is entirely unreasonable to consider photography and art as mutually exclusive subsets. The question remains, however, whether there is any photography which is not art. If a broad definition of art is used (art is the product of creativity and/or imagination), then all photography is art (Figure 2). Even if the photograph is taken by a computer, a human designed the algorithm and the photograph is indirectly a product of human creativity. By more restrictive definitions of art, however, it may be reasonable to argue that there is photography which is not art. I can't seem to find any definitions which would apply to such a permutation, so if you have one, please elaborate.