This an encyclopedic presentation of premier photographers in alphabetic order from Aarons to Zwart.
The author describes it as a "sort of pantheon" of photographers whose works are recognized internationally and who have contributed to the "culture of the photographic image."
As I reviewed it, I wondered for whom it was being published? For those photographers who were lucky enough to be listed, for other professional photographers, or for the general art loving audience? As it is presently organized you need to know you are looking for, like looking for a word in a dictionary. Moreover like searching for a word, you frequently miss the opportunity to find other words. Only by happenstance will you discover new ones.
I believe Quetzal could have improved the value of this fine collection if he organized it into certain genres or types of photography, i.e., landscape, fashion, commercial-advertising, exotic, people, animals, portraiture, urban, rural, era, etc. That way the user could discover artists of a similar bent by searching within that category. Of course, comparisons could also be facilitated. It could help the editor as well by identifying any gaps or under-representations in a well-rounded pantheon.
In deference to other professional photographers who may be looking at the works of their idols in this book, he could have included some insight as to their technique, equipment or philosophy used. This could "up the value proposition" of the book for that audience enormously.
Finally, for the general art audience perhaps a bit more information could have been offered on just what is so unique about the individual photos. For non-photographers it is not clear what makes a great photograph.
Just some thoughts.