Fenton's reality or big brother's purchase?

There were three points made by Natalie Houston in her article, Reading the Victorian Souvenir: Sonnets and Photographs of the Crimean War, which piqued my interest. Those points are:

For the first time ever, war photographs were available to the public for purchase and private collecting. This new access to historic photos forever changed the role of public institutions, such as museums. Museums began sharing the responsibility for the memorializing, housing and the sharing of national history with the public who purchased the photos.





Second point: Fenton's photographic work of the Crimean War was underwritten by the British government, through his employer, Agnew. Because Fenton's charge was to reiterate what was already known and report nothing new, it did not answer questions which had been raised about the ill-preparedness of the troops to weather the war and its harsh conditions. The first and second photos show the types of clothing available to a few of the men and their sleeping quarters and a weapon or so, but these could not fairly be called true indicators of life in the war zone at Crimea.









Final point which I enjoyed: Houston discussed how realistic Fenton's body of photographs really was, if at all, because the subjects had to hold their poses for several or more seconds at a time, in order for the photo to take and process. I believe that the photos may have started out to be a candid, but when the subjects were required by the science of photography at the moment to hold their pose, the photos could fairly be said to be no longer candid.
The photo to the left is titled: Two French officers, seated, and Zouave, standing with arm resting on rifle