Further to my question on the readings of photographs.
Suppose we are shown a photograph of an open field, a few trees around the edges. In the sky is a blurry oblong blob. The person holding the photograph out to us excitedly claims that it's a picture of an alien space craft.
Most likely, we don't believe that the blob is an alien space craft, we suspect in fact that it is a pie tin being waved around a bit.
At this moment there are two of what I called personal readings in play. The first is this is a picture of an alien spacecraft and the second is this is a picture of a pie plate. The separation of these two readings appears on first consideration to depend mainly on whether one is, or is not, a lunatic. This isn't quite right. The two readings differ for very specific reasons, which have almost nothing to do with the actual existence of alien spacecraft.
If you believe in UFOs, you may well read the photo as evidence of alien spacecraft in the skies above our planet. If you do not believe in UFOs, you will see a probable pie plate. Note that this has nothing to do with alien spacecraft, it has to do with what you believe. This is about you, not about UFOs.
Again, we don't think it's a pie tin because there's no such thing as aliens, we think it's a pie plate because we don't believe in aliens.
A critical reading acknowledges both positions, and recognizes that one belief system will produce one reading, and another, another.
A forensic reading in my parlance seeks not to understand what anyone might think, but rather to work out what the hell the object actually was.
All three of these things can be as deep or as cursory as you like.