I know a "professional fine art photographer" who told me he was self-taught—just before asking me which it was, shutter or aperture, that controlled depth of field. "I can never remember that."

I chose to pay for an education but never got a degree, and I have had people laugh at me for wasting that money when the best way to learn is to "just keep shooting a lot of pictures." Then I see what they have accomplished by doing that, and I wonder who really had the best way...

I know a "professional fine art photographer" who told me he was self-taught—just before asking me which it was, shutter or aperture, that controlled depth of field. "I can never remember that."

I chose to pay for an education but never got a degree, and I have had people laugh at me for wasting that money when the best way to learn is to "just keep shooting a lot of pictures." Then I see what they have accomplished by doing that, and I wonder who really had the best way...

There is a strong placebo effect that runs through all of photography.

Some of that is certainly to help other photographers (folks just looking at the images could not care less about that info naturally)

But it is also part of the placebo...

Someone who takes an image...if they took it with a Leica...they want you to know that. It works in their favor if you do. Same with lenses...etc.

You don't see paintings with a list of paint types they used or brushes...usually just photography.

It's free marketing...of the mind.

Most folks do it...most sites encourage it.

It's amazing to me that people try to make a simple choice controversial. If you don't like data, then don't bother looking at it. If you like data then look at it.

Whether the data is helpful depends on how the person looking at the data actually evaluates it. For example what shutter speed someone uses can be very informational when someone is shooting waves or waterfalls. If someone wants to blur a waterfall then perhaps looking at the data from a number of photos that blurred the water will give the individual a starting point.

I have a book titled Photograph Like A Thief. The book is about how to analyze a photo, including where the light source is, the exposure data and other clues to how the photo was taken so that you can recreate either the photo or the style of photo.

It isn't something that is for everyone. If you know what you are shooting and are happy with the results then you probably do not need that kind of information. On the other hand, if you are wanting to experiment seeing something that someone else did that is similar to what you want to try may help you succeed in shooting that style or subject matter more quickly.

There is no harm in providing data, only in not properly assessing the data.