Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

When posting images in this forum we often see a set of data relative to the camera settings at the time the image was recorded; I often wonder whether the published information (EXIF data) was derived from the camera's automatic settings for that particular set of conditions or whether it was the photographer's knowledge or intuition that resulted in those settings. In the later case, it would be helpful to know why and how those adjustments were selected, including shutter speed, aperture, ASA, lens focal length and most important DOF. Sometimes this information could help us define whether we create a simply good image or a great one.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

If I have to go through all that every time I post a photo, I’ll quit.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

All of the METADATA is saved within the image file. Ain't digital grand.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

With some technical understanding of cameras, any / all cameras, you can infer some amount of information based on the depth and accuracy of the reported EXIF data. Take the example, below, the most recent posting I found attached to the Photo Gallery with EXIF data. Beyond a wonderful capture of an oriole, what do we see from displaying and reading the EXIF data?

I just displayed the exposure. The ExifViewer Chrome plug-in doesn't expand all the EXIF to one window, so you have to scroll this section to see all the available data. From the exposure we can see the photographer purposefully selected the speed at 1/800 in Shutter Priority. We can see the metering mode, but we don't know if the camera automatically selected the ISO or whether the photographer did. We can see the max aperture for this lens is f/5.6 at 400mm, but we don't know why (or if) the photographer chose to shoot wide-open for this focal length and lens. We don't know if the photographer coaxed the camera to select a biased exposure using Exposure Compensation. We can see the processing software used was Capture One 21, but we can't tell if the image was captured in JPEG or RAW. There's a few advanced ways to dump more of the EXIF data and visually analyze the text, but still you'll be left with questions that can be answered / confirmed only by discussing their exposure technique directly with the photographer. We cannot see where and how the photographer configured the auto-focus nor the number of images taken during the session to achieve this result.

If you would like more details regarding another photographer's approach, you should be taking the initiative to review the available EXIF data and then ask them directly to confirm or to expand what you can learn from the EXIF data.

There's no magic bullets. I believe in proven best practices:

a) Practice your shooting technique
b) Analyze the pixel-level details of your images
c) Closely inspect the technical details of your images
d) Consider what was successful and / or failed in each image
e) Research issues you don't understand or suggestions of what to try different
f) Plan to exercise new ideas in your shooting technique
g) Repeat

Talking directly to other photographers about how they created images you admire is a great way to perform the step "Research issues you don't understand or suggestions of what to try different". All of the steps above are things every photographer can perform on their own, should be performing on their own, rather than creating false dependencies on others to provide this data for your benefit.

(Download)

Leitz Loc: Solms

If I have to copy what someone else did every time I take a picture, I'll quit.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

You and me both. I look at it like "Sharing recipes", giving me an idea of where to start my own creation.

treadwl Loc: South Florida

Unless I forget, which does happen, I generally post camera model, lens, ISO, Shutter speed and aperture along with any filters that I used in making the capture. I also will answer any questions asked regarding the image. I figure this is a learning forum and if this information helps someone else, I'm glad to provide it.

BebuLamar

When posting an image I don't think it's necessarily to post any information. However, I would answer any questions if asked. Including where and when the image was taken. Posting a bunch of EXIF data and the how and why would bore a lot of people.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Understanding specific "camera settings" (I don't really like that term) is pretty useless unless a photographer expects to find himself in exactly the same light (which can't generally be identified fully from looking at a photograph) with the same background conditions and using the same lens as in a particular exemplar photograph. For instance, given the way the background is rendered in the example that Paul provided above, it is impossible to know whether the day was overcast or the bird was simply perched in the shade. The answer to that unknown would reveal a huge difference in both the quantity and quality of light available. It can be instructive to note whether the photographer used an unusually high shutter speed for some reason, or an extremely high ISO, or an extremely wide aperture opening, but these pieces of information are useful in a general way...not whether the ISO was 4,000 vs. 3,200, but whether it was 4,000 vs. 400 or 320.

The real answer is to learn and master fundamental principles of photography. When are fast shutter speeds important? When are they not necessary? Are there disadvantages to using shutter speeds that are too high? Too low? (And yes, there used to be, in the days of film.) When are high ISOs needed? When can high ISOs ruin a photograph? And what is too high, anyway?

Doing photography correctly requires some education in these fundamentals. That education will take you a lot farther than an equal amount of training around mechanically copying what someone else did in a situation that may or may not have even been similar to the current environment. And despite what you will hear here, that education is not difficult to master. There is no reason to get all conflagrated in a mysterious "exposure triangle." Just learn the fundamentals, learn the three basic ways to set exposure, enter your starting points, and trust your light meter or the metering system in your camera to solve for the final value(s). Oh...you do need to learn how to use your metering system correctly and effectively, but that is incredibly easy, with a little practice.

So take a class. Or find a partner. Or find a book and learn on your own. Take notes. Compare your notes to your results. It is impossible to break your camera by making a mistake. But don't be too quick with the "Delete" button. Study your mistakes. Understand what went wrong. Figure out how to move toward "correct." And have fun. This is not an initiation.Don't let anyone else make it one. And don't make it one yourself.

User ID

Exif tells you the exposure mode that was set. OTOH that can be misleading. Toggled AE/L is actually manual control but exif calls it AE. Lumix cameras have an AE feature that automatically sets exposure while a camera is in M-mode. That will show as M in the exif. But the AE actually set the exposure.

Knowing the camera settings used by another photographer is nearly useless. Comments about what had been that photographer’s concerns when setting the camera can be very useful, but the actual settings don’t mean much to another user.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I can offer an anecdote of a similar situation. For shooting with adapted manual focus lenses on a Sony mirrorless, I've tended to be shutter priority. I thought to do an informal survey of images on Flickr showing this is how most other photographers do the same. But, their EXIF was reporting 'AUTO'. I know that wasn't true and my job dropped open when I saw 'AUTO' in my images as well. But, that's what Sony is writing into the files when the camera cannot detect and manage the aperture of a manual focus, non-electronic lens, it cannot detect or communicate with.

Our OP would be a bit SOL on analyzing these images without the insight of asking the photographer.