I know this is a challenging one and it can cause heated debate...I am looking to define a set of 'genre' that allow a grouping of images by something that might generically be called a genre. Having done quite a bit of research one of the best raw lists I found was at one of the Pentax forums (http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography/87698-photography-genres-demystified-muddied-i%92m-not-quite-sure.html
However this still mixes function and subject and is a very long list where a good number of the supposed genres can be considered sub-topics of a broader genre. So I have tried to organize all this and I am need of feedback regarding the results. My intended use is twofold: I am developing software for a large photo club and the international PSA recognized event they organize each year; and I tag many of my own image library with hierarchical keywords starting with genre. My objective was to try and group, and regroup, and force fit within reason into a list of 10 or less overall genre...I finished with 9. What do all you CV folks think?
Close-up (includes macro, scientific, forensic, astrophotography, photomicroscopy etc)
Creative (includes abstract and alteredreality)
Event (includes sports and wedding)
Model (includes glamour, fashion, boudoir, nude)
Nature (includes wildlife and landscape [no hand of man])
Photojournalism (includes documentary and human interest)
Portrait (includes candid, studio and environmental)
Still Life (includes studio and product)
Travel (includes transport, landscape [pictorial], cityscape, urban, architecture, aerial)
This deliberately excludes what I consider to be more a function than a genre. For example commercial, advertising, stock, fine art etc are more about the designation of usage rather than content. A shot of a given genre could be used in all the functions depending on the job. One of the biggest confusions I found was this blurring of form and function.
Thoughts, corrections, general abuse...all welcome!:-)