Just curious what people think is the "ideal" amount of information that should accompany a posted image here.
Not just technical details, or gear info, but more subjective information, too.
Based on the images I see, opinions seem to range evenly across the spectrum – but I'm curious if this perception is really true:
At one extreme are LFers – whose work I admire – who post nothing about their image. Nothing. I'll be quick to add, however, that many viewers forget to consult the poster's profile, which often addresses what the viewer might want to know, such as format, lens, film, scanning habits, etc. But too many times, I'll click a profile and it's blank – nothing there that might provide info about a lonely image. Perhaps the poster thinks it's best this way, and I've heard good reasons for this approach.
At the other extreme are people, just as talented, who give so much detail, it borders on what some might call superfluous, distracting viewers from the beauty or interest of an image. "Just the facts, Mr. Photographer," as the investigator might say, "just the facts."
That leaves many, many more – count me among them – who fall somewhere in the middle. They often rely on a "Goldilocks" method, providing a balance of basics they think the typical viewer will appreciate. Not too cold with details. Not too hot. Just right. Of course, not every perceptive viewer is satisfied by warm porridge.
So please tell us, what information should go w/ an image? Or be excluded?
And if you believe "it depends," please tell us when and why.
-----
Some ideas: Camera, Movements, Lens, Filtration, Film, Exposure, Zone values, Tripod type/position, Weather, Location, Info about the subject (portrait sitter's identity, type of rock or tree, history of area), Unique set-up requirements, Unusual challenges, Quality of the light, Personal/subjective aims, "Messages," Film processing, Scanning info.
Bookmarks