With most photographs, there is assumed to be some amount of objectivity, an assumption that I think for the most part is appropriate. Yes, the photographer needed to choose the angle, and the exposure time, and many details like that, but the image that was captured still represents the actual light that was there at the time. With typologies, the assumption of objectivity is even stronger. Because the images captured are methodological, they beg to be compared and contrasted with each other, comparisons that can only be meaningfully made if we assume the images are accurate. But what they need even more than accuracy is consistency: each subject being captured with the same medium, from the same angle, in the same fashion. As the reading describes, this is often very difficult to achieve, but advances in technology make it increasingly more possible. Though no method of capture can be totally objective, careful procedural photography is still a powerful tool for observation, and a great medium for scientific and artistic typologies.