Am I the Only Hog who's Curious?
Sep 15, 2018 10:56:28 #
bobmcculloch wrote:
Camera/lens combo might be useful, actual settings? why? your not there at the same time, conditions change, f stop for depth of field? shutter? do you really need to know, and if you do why not check the exif of the shot?
I agree. Maybe focal length and f stop might be interesting in some situations but other that the "settings" require more information like sunny or cloudy or sunrise or sunset etc. if outside and
what filters were used if any and if inside details on lighting is necessary. There is a lot mor to it than basic EXIF.
Sep 15, 2018 10:56:47 #
Lighting conditions and subject matter will vary for outside image making. I have a plugin to view EXIF but generally it's more observational when there is an issue with the image. I tend to agree with others that generally it really doesn't matter.
Sep 15, 2018 11:02:25 #
Does a chef give away his secret recipe for success?
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Sep 15, 2018 11:06:48 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Does a chef give away his secret recipe for success?
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Sep 15, 2018 11:16:15 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Does a chef give away his secret recipe for success?
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
I am not a chef so I don't have any secret. I never remove the EXIF data or really check if it's there. I think the EXIF data is useless. If someone wants to know about an image that I post just ask. I have no secret as I am not a chef.
Sep 15, 2018 11:34:52 #
Jakebrake wrote:
This speaks to the essence of the issue: once you learn exposure via your own experiences (whether through careful testing or experimenting, and then analyzing the results), there will be no need to remember what someone else did. And how would you do that on a photo outing anyway, consult your copious notes? ... if I ever find myself in a similar environment, would it not be helpful to have some fore knowledge as to the settings used by a poster who captured a stunning image?
"Stunning" is far more than settings, including composition and editing, and having an understanding of light.
You also need to understand that there are equivalent exposures. A set of numbers is meaningless. You can see examples of that with the topics posted before/after every full moon
Maybe you want the same exposure as someone who took a photo under similar conditions, but you need to use a faster shutter speed because you are a bit wobbly hand-holding the camera. Now what?
Pay attention to the light, pay attention to your results, and after much practice, if you cannot figure out "what went wrong" with a particularly tricky exposure situation, post to Photo Analysis and ask.
One example of why settings are meaningless:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-535524-1.html
-
Sep 15, 2018 11:43:54 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
If it concerns you so much, you should install an EXIF viewer into your browser. Then you can view those settings for yourself.
Thanks for that, but how would an amateur like myself do that? Never mind, I'll just Google it and try to figure it out.
Sep 15, 2018 11:47:06 #
Jakebrake wrote:
Bingo! 👍 When a poster includes the information it gives me ideas as to improving my own photography. That's how I learn and that's what I use the site for. A hearty kudos and thank you to those who do include that info in your postings!
Actually I wonder how you improve your photography by looking at other people settings? I really want to learn your approach to learning.
Sep 15, 2018 12:18:23 #
Raz Theo wrote:
Why do we not post our settings with our photos, especially when downloads are offered? I often see folks asking what settings were used but it must be a cultural thing not to voluntarily reveal what you used to get that shot.
I, for one, am always interested. C'mon, give it up.
Thanks
I, for one, am always interested. C'mon, give it up.
Thanks
This is a question that is asked very often (if you were to use the "Search" function at the top of the page you can read these discussions). Let me ask you a question. How would knowing those settings help you? Settings are determined by the light at the time the picture is taken and since outdoor natural light is always changing using somebody else settings, even at the exact same location, won't be of any help.
Sep 15, 2018 12:21:07 #
Longshadow wrote:
Just curious the settings used.Trade off of ISO vs whatever is my interest.I'm curious, how do they help and how do they affect your interpretation of the image?
Sep 15, 2018 12:29:02 #
Looking at a couple of the OP's photos, I'm reminded of another reason that "the numbers" are going to be useless: his gorgeous cell phone shot here.
Aperture f/1.8. Assuming you (the collective you, not singling out anyone) have a lens that even stops down that far, do you understand that depth of field is dependent on camera and distance to subject, along with aperture? Besides cell phone cameras, bridge cameras and M4/3 offer more depth of field per a specific aperture than does a dslr.
Aperture f/1.8. Assuming you (the collective you, not singling out anyone) have a lens that even stops down that far, do you understand that depth of field is dependent on camera and distance to subject, along with aperture? Besides cell phone cameras, bridge cameras and M4/3 offer more depth of field per a specific aperture than does a dslr.
Sep 15, 2018 12:30:36 #
I figure that anyone who can see the relationship of the settings to the photo they are looking at already has the knowledge they need to do it on their own.
I believe (just my opinion) that many folks think they are learning something. However, since they don't know the conditions when the picture was taken are just being fooled. And who really remembers the settings someone else used when they think they are in a similar situation. Do they log on to UHH with a cell phone and look for that similar picture?
--
I believe (just my opinion) that many folks think they are learning something. However, since they don't know the conditions when the picture was taken are just being fooled. And who really remembers the settings someone else used when they think they are in a similar situation. Do they log on to UHH with a cell phone and look for that similar picture?
--
Sep 15, 2018 12:41:25 #
bobmcculloch wrote:
Camera/lens combo might be useful, actual settings? why? your not there at the same time, conditions change, f stop for depth of field? shutter? do you really need to know, and if you do why not check the exif of the shot?
For some shots it could be useful. Oh, 30 sec shutter, that is how he smoothed out the water for instance.
Sep 15, 2018 12:43:24 #
Raz Theo wrote:
Why do we not post our settings with our photos, especially when downloads are offered? I often see folks asking what settings were used but it must be a cultural thing not to voluntarily reveal what you used to get that shot.
I, for one, am always interested. C'mon, give it up.
Thanks
I, for one, am always interested. C'mon, give it up.
Thanks
Settings may satisfy your curiosity but they have little value otherwise since it is unlikely the light and perhaps even the gear is similar. You won't remember them anyway when the time comes to shoot. In addition settings won't reveal processing which can alter the image drastically.
I post them sometimes just for the heck of it or when I'm asked.
If you need help, time is better spent watching YouTube tutorials. Training on every aspect of photography is available, and its mostly free.
Sep 15, 2018 12:44:16 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Does a chef give away his secret recipe for success?
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
Seemingly idiotic answer but if you think about it, this is not about settings but about something that really cannot be shared, even if we tried: Flair. A chef knows what to add when and how. Even having the whole ingredients list will not help.
EXIF, camera/lens combinations are red herrings, nothing more.
I quite agree
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.