I’ve noticed something interesting happening in photography communities lately. Photographers describe their work using three terms almost interchangeably: abstract, experimental, and conceptual. While these words sound similar enough, I’ve realized they’re creating more confusion than clarity—especially for photographers trying to articulate their creative direction.

The Problem With Mixing Terminology

Here’s what I’ve discovered through countless portfolio reviews and artist statements: photographers often blend together their visual style, their creative process, and their overall project structure under a single label. This approach leaves viewers—and sometimes the artists themselves—unsure about what actually defines the work.

Think about it this way. When you call something “abstract,” are you describing how it looks? When you say “experimental,” are you explaining your approach? And “conceptual”—does that explain your underlying message? The answer is usually yes to all three, which is exactly why we need to separate these ideas.

Breaking Down Three Distinct Levels

1. Visual Style (Abstract) Abstract work focuses on how your images appear. I think of abstraction as the visual presentation layer. Your photographs might emphasize color, form, texture, or composition over recognizable subjects. An abstract photograph asks viewers to experience the image through pure visual elements rather than narrative or subject matter.

2. Process (Experimental) Experimental work highlights how you create. This is about your methods and techniques. Are you trying new camera settings? Playing with unconventional materials? Testing unexpected editing approaches? Experimental photography isn’t necessarily about the final aesthetic—it’s about pushing boundaries in your creative practice.

3. Concept (Conceptual) Conceptual photography centers on why you’re making the work. What’s the bigger idea behind your project? These pieces communicate a message, explore a theme, or challenge viewer assumptions. Conceptual work uses photography as a vehicle for ideas rather than as a purely visual experience.

Putting It Together

Here’s what I find most helpful: a single body of work can occupy all three levels simultaneously. You might create conceptually-driven images (exploring identity) using an experimental process (alternative printing methods) with an abstract visual style (minimal composition).

The key is learning to identify which level you’re actually describing when you talk about your photography. This clarity helps you communicate your artistic intentions more effectively, whether you’re writing an artist statement, pitching to galleries, or simply discussing your work with other photographers.

Next time you describe your photography, try asking yourself: Am I talking about how it looks, how I made it, or what it means? Once you understand the difference, you’ll find your artistic voice becomes much clearer.