Doug Kerr
Well-known member
I am disappointed by the relative infrequency with which images presented here are accompanied by Exif metadata.
Some here have suggested that we should not be at all interested in the technical particulars of how an image was obtained.
But this is not a "photograph" forum - it is a "photography" forum. And the "how" is part of the story just as much as the "why", the "what", and the "where".
By the way, this is no different for images initially acquired by photochemical photography. The information about the particulars of the capture there are often just as much of interest, and the fact that the images are presented here in digital form makes it easy and unobtrusive to provide it.
And of course, by providing that information as Exif metadata, those who are not at all interested will not have their view of the image cluttered.
Just a thought.
Best regards,
Doug
Some here have suggested that we should not be at all interested in the technical particulars of how an image was obtained.
But this is not a "photograph" forum - it is a "photography" forum. And the "how" is part of the story just as much as the "why", the "what", and the "where".
By the way, this is no different for images initially acquired by photochemical photography. The information about the particulars of the capture there are often just as much of interest, and the fact that the images are presented here in digital form makes it easy and unobtrusive to provide it.
And of course, by providing that information as Exif metadata, those who are not at all interested will not have their view of the image cluttered.
Just a thought.
Best regards,
Doug