I disagree. Exposure info is VERY interesting. Most photo magazines supply
the info and when they don't, many readers state they'd want the info to
reappear when possible.
If you are a student of photography you are very interested in seeing the
exposure details in a photography book. Actually seeing what f/22 can do as
opposed to f/4 for landscapes, for instance is a LOT more interesting than just
reading about it. Or 1/500th as opposed to 1/30th when discusiing moving
subjects. The list goes on and on.
I was just using the tape recorder as an example. I know quite a few who do
like to keep track of exposure details for when they get their slides back, if
they like a particular shot and want to duplicate it, or if something "just
isn't quite right" they'll know what and how much to adjust in the exposure
without experimenting all over again. A notepad works well too.
Personally, I've only done this a few times, but I have done it.
Keep a record of your shots, settings, etc.? Why? What are the chances
that you will ever again in your life take the same photo under exactly
the same lighting and climatological conditions? Given that they are
nil, what good does keeping the data do? I'm always fascinated by the
fact that on the various lists people post photos with the film type, f
stop, lens, etc. - and yet when I open almost any photo book - that is
monographs of photos by renowned photographers - I don't find any of
that data, and I usually don't find any mention of camera brand, lens
types, etc.; I just find photographs. There may be an essay discussing
the way the photographer worked, his or her purpose in photographing,
his or her 'vision,' but no technical data or discussion. Odd.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >