"This is only because photography, by its very nature, translates all experiences into images, and thus has the destiny to be equally captured by diversified values." (Democratization of the Photo Arts I)

One answer that can be drawn from this is that, in the definition of marginal art, "photography" is either an art that cannot be classified into three categories, or it is not "art" itself.
In other words, photography loses its identity when it is defined as an art form, but it can become an art form when it produces "art," a product that brings about social benefits, if we view art as a perspective that can be infinitely expanded. This is an aesthetic recognition that can be said to be the self-assertion of photography.
However, the vagueness of the concept of evaluation of photographic works up to now has been a paradox in itself, as it is an evaluation system specific to "photography" that cannot be formulated in order to "casually" evaluate and criticize works of photographic expression that do not have the logical interpretation of contemporary art (excluding documentary and other forms of expression that aim to record).
In fact, the fact that we have been ignoring this sensory "fluctuation" as something that is just "beautiful" exposes the fact that we have been negligent in our "discernment".