In a forthcoming book titled Why Photography Matters as Art as Never Before, art historian Michael Fried argues that the Bechers' work, with its grouping of similar structures, calls for "a more comparative, in that sense more discerning, even intellectually acute kind of seeing" than objects displayed in isolation. The Bechers' photographs have often been associated with Minimalist art and were first introduced to an American audience in an article by one of that school's pre-eminent artists, Carl Andre. But Fried (known for his previous critiques of Minimalism) rejects the parallel.

While Andre and other Minimalists place "found" objects—such as industrial-grade bricks or metal plates, as in MoMA's 144 Lead Square—in a new situation, namely art galleries, with the purpose of staging an encounter between viewer and object, the Bechers are in a very different business. The Minimalists wanted to purge their materials—which Donald Judd called "specific objects"—of any association with original use or aesthetic interpretation. The Becher images, by contrast, always give at least an indication of the original setting of their chosen structures, thus insisting on their essential "rootedness" in a particular place. As Fried notes, there is something "primitive" in their conviction that their photographs (as the Bechers insist) are "objects, not motifs," and that "the photo is merely a substitute for the object." One has the impression that the Bechers would prefer to transport their audience to these industrial sites; failing that, they bring home their photographs. Again, one is reminded of collectors or, say, bird-watchers.