I'm referring to the typical "landscape", "portrait", "nature" categories, as frequently seen on sites like this and on the chapter headings of all the "How To Make Your Photographs Look Just Like Everyone Elses" books. Christ, it's dull. Now, compare this with music: we have rock, classical, pop, jazz... These seem to me to be categories based on musical style, not subject matter... And with movies, we have comedy, thriller, romance, horror... Sure, I know we also have crime, war, sci-fi and so on, but there does seem to be more in the way of emotion-oriented classification applied in the world of cinema. So, what does this tell us - if anything - about photography and photographers? That style, emotion and mood are often secondary to subject matter to many people, perhaps...? Or is it simply more convenient to organise photos by subject matter...? Do you think the widespread adoption of these simplistic classifications is likely to lead some photographers - particularly beginners - straight down the slippery slope of cliche, causing them to blindly bypass individualism and experimentation...? Is it likely to limit the type of photography we get to see, on sites like PN, for example...? Any thoughts...?