Pictures
Sep 12, 2021 12:27:08 #
gvarner wrote:
I agree, a brief recap of the vitals would be nice to have. I know that EXIF data is available on the download but most often I don’t want to bother with that. Camera-lens-shutter-aperture-ISO.
So you don't want to bother, but you want the photographer to bother for you?
Sep 12, 2021 12:28:02 #
Bill 45 wrote:
When I am taking a picture, I not thinking about the camera or lens. I think about the subject can I get a good picture. After taking a picture I moving on to the next picture, so I don't have time to write down any thing.
Sep 12, 2021 12:30:12 #
rmalarz wrote:
I agree with you, CPO. I use a variety of cameras but the final result is what's important, not the equipment used to make the initial photographic exposure.
--Bob
--Bob
Sep 12, 2021 12:33:15 #
When people look at an image from a mirrorless camera, they see the difference not just with their eyes, they feel the difference in the depth of their heart.
Sep 12, 2021 12:38:20 #
An additional thought, if I were to post this photograph and include the EXIF data, it would be misleading. The reason being the exposure techniques involved are suitable for the processing that follows. Thus, are entirely misleading. Without processing information, EXIF info means nothing.
That said, all of my photographs have EXIF data attached, including film. However, it's stripped when posting. I tend to keep notes, especially with film and a necessity when shooting large format.
--Bob
That said, all of my photographs have EXIF data attached, including film. However, it's stripped when posting. I tend to keep notes, especially with film and a necessity when shooting large format.
--Bob
rmalarz wrote:
I agree with you, CPO. I use a variety of cameras but the final result is what's important, not the equipment used to make the initial photographic exposure.
--Bob
--Bob
Sep 12, 2021 12:46:23 #
Retired CPO wrote:
I don't think you will get a very good response from this post. Unless there is a very unusual photo posted under very unusual circumstances most people will not include that kind of info with their posts. Bottom line, it's really not that important. It's the photographer, not the hardware.
If PP hasn't stripped the EXIF info. The info can be gleaned there. One site I go to offers that info but doesn't display it unless you click on the display EXIF info.
It's a legitimate question in my view especially if one is housebound and wishes to gather information on an image that is pleasing.
Sep 12, 2021 12:47:30 #
As I just pointed out, that information can be terribly misleading.
--Bob
--Bob
no12mo wrote:
If PP hasn't stripped the EXIF info. The info can be gleaned there. One site I go to offers that info but doesn't display it unless you click on the display EXIF info.
It's a legitimate question in my view especially if one is housebound and wishes to gather information on an image that is pleasing.
It's a legitimate question in my view especially if one is housebound and wishes to gather information on an image that is pleasing.
Sep 12, 2021 13:15:28 #
Dave327 wrote:
Every picture taken with a modern digital camera has all the data encoded in the picture. In windows pull up properties from the drop down menu. On my iPad I use an app called Exif Viewer. The data is very detailed with all the info about the photo, camera, lens, focal length, date taken, etc. However, the photographer does have the option to remove the EXIF Data.
Respectfully, as I mentioned before. PP can remove that data. I'm not familiar when one saves a RAW image ove to JPG if the EXIF data gets stripped. Anyone care to enlighten me?
Alan
Sep 12, 2021 13:16:40 #
gessman wrote:
I believe I recall admin saying unless a file is marked "store original" his receiving and resizing software strips the exif data from all other images unless that practice has been stopped.
Well, there you go. A mystery is resolved for me.
Thanks, Alan
Sep 12, 2021 13:18:22 #
billnikon wrote:
Sony a9, Sony 200-600 mm lens, 1/400 sec. f8 at 600 mm, ISO 800. Red Shoulder Hawk, Green Cay, Florida.
VERY NICE picture. And yes, the info helps my viewing experience
Thanks, Alan
Sep 12, 2021 13:20:40 #
billnikon wrote:
Sony a9, Sony 600mm at f4, iso 400, 1/2000 sec. Great Egret mating call, Wakodahatchee, Florida. back light
Gosh! Makes me want to visit Florida
Sep 12, 2021 13:24:51 #
There are three responses to a great image: yes, no and Canon sure does make nice pictures.
Sep 12, 2021 14:27:36 #
Aj3939
Loc: Valley Forge
Picture Taker wrote:
Great pictures ain't the camera as a great meal ain't the stove.
An absolutely spot in response 👏
Sep 12, 2021 16:33:38 #
Donald Romp wrote:
Could the people who post the great pictures please tell us the camera used and the lens.
I enjoy these pictures so much as I am house bound due to my health at this time and miss going and seeing different sites. Such joy for me to see outside of 4 walls till I can again get out and about.
Thank you
I enjoy these pictures so much as I am house bound due to my health at this time and miss going and seeing different sites. Such joy for me to see outside of 4 walls till I can again get out and about.
Thank you
I typically post camera and lens models with most of my shots.
Sep 12, 2021 16:58:07 #
rmalarz wrote:
An additional thought, if I were to post this phot... (show quote)
Magnificent results 🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.