Quick Tip: Does EXIF Tell the Whole Story?

Quick Tip: Does EXIF Tell the Whole Story?

on Nov 24th 2012 with 6 comments

Does EXIF data like speed, aperture and ISO give enough information to replicate a picture? This question arises every time people online ask others for that data. There is no simple answer to that, but there’s something for all of us to learn.

””
The numbered segments show sections of the caterpillar images taken with different lenses, but with the same exposure values. Can you tell which lens was used for what?

Some websites will ask you for the metadata on your images and not even let you post them without that information, defending it is important for people learning photography. Some even go as far as saying that you can write down whatever you think the picture was taken at, an option that frightens me. I rather not write anything and let people make an educated guess.

””
The exposure for this image was 1/250 f/6.3 at 100 ISO. But the exposure was the same on the images that follow.

While there is quite a lot of data written with each image these days, different programs will show different parts of it. And many programs that save images “for web” usually take away most of the info. You should also remember that some websites strip images of their EXIF data. Furthermore, some owners like to keep it secret, so they choose that option when saving the image. And, if you’re used to copying the original image and pasting it into a new document, as I usually do when I am preparing images for websites, then all the data is lost.

I do agree that the EXIF data (and EXIF is an acronym for Exchangeable Image File Format) is important for the photographer to understand how he or she made the image, but does sharing some of that info help others to learn photography?

””
When you “save for web” many programs will strip most metadata from the images.

I’ve asked this question to different people and I get different answers. Some will state it is essential while others believe, like me, it is more important for people to understand, from looking at an image, what the photographer decided. I mean, we all can see if an image is blurred, if the aperture was wide or small, and take our own conclusions from that.

Photographers coming from the days of film, I did not have any EXIF function to keep my data, so I wrote down the essential info about my pictures. It was such a standard practice for some, that one could buy special sheets of paper or notebooks with space to write data for each shot. The essential trio – aperture, speed, ISO – was present but also space to write notes about the conditions for the shoot. And when looking at pictures we would recall, more or less, the exact conditions at the time, and all the information could fit into place.

””
The exposure for this image was also 1/250, f/6.3 at 100 ISO, but this image was taken from another point of view.

A Little Game

I do think it is still good practice, for some work, to keep a “diary” that can have all the information the EXIF does not provide: weather conditions, special equipment used, like filters, manual flash, etc. And you can even go as far as drawing the setup created if it is important to keep. This “field diary” can be a valuable asset when you want to study your pictures and explain them to others.

Now, if I just post my images on the web and state the exposure trio data, is that of much help to others? Does it make it easier for them to do a photo like mine? Better said, does the EXIF data tell all the truth about a picture?

Let’s do a little game. Look at the picture on top, with numbered segments from the three caterpillar pictures under it. As you can see on the info on the different pictures, they were all taken at the same aperture, speed and ISO: 1/250 f/6.3, 100 ISO. Is that enough for you to make similar images?

””
Same exposure, and about the same point of view as the second photo. But, again, which lens was used here? Read on to know the answer.

I guess not. I must say this collection was made on purpose for this game or quiz, so I tried to keep the caterpillar the same size and keep the background at a distance to get about the same result. The image with the number three (3) was done with a 60mm macro lens. Image number two (2) was taken with a 17-40mm zoom lens on the 40mm setting, while image number one (1) was taken with a 100-400mm lens on the 300mm setting. All with a APS-C DSLR. As you see, just the information on the exposure does not tell the whole story.

So, the EXIF does not tell the whole story. Also remember that while with film the final image was the result of the exposure selected by the photographer, images edited in Photoshop may change, in terms of the final lighting, so what is shared on the web gives a different idea from what the EXIF metadata tells.

Now, do you still feel it is essential to share EXIF data with others? Or should it be part of a longer explanation that tells how the picture was created, from the taking moment to the editing in the computer?

 
Enjoyed this Post?

Subscribe to our RSS Feed, Follow us on Twitter or simply recommend us to friends and colleagues!

By

Rollover to read this author's bio or click through to see a full list of posts by this author.

Jose Antunes is a freelance writer and photographer based in Portugal. Besides writing about technical and creative aspects of photography for various publications he hosts workshops and leads photo tours to reveal the hidden perspectives from his country. Find more at his website, Jose Antunes Cultural Photographer  

Plus Premium
 
 
  • http://twitter.com/JDennisThomas J. Dennis Thomas

    I think you’re blurring the distinction between EXIF data and exposure settings information. All of the information (except shooting conditions) are in the EXIF data. The exposure settings, the metering mode, the lens used, the focal length, the camera type, ALL of that and more is in the EXIF, not just the aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Also in most cameras you can add an image comment to the EXIF, so ideally you would add the shooting conditions to the content which can be seen in the EXIF data.

    EXIF does indeed tell the whole story, you just have to know where to look. Most websites, such as flickr, don’t show all of the info, but it IS stored in the EXIF.

    • http://www.quillaja.net quillaja

      Exactly. I sometimes look at the EXIF info of other people’s work to see what lens/focal length they were using in addition to the exposure settings.

      The EXIF data also contains other data, but that’s more often messed up by photoshop, etc, or otherwise isn’t as helpful.

    • Jose Antunes
      Author

      I stand by my writing. I am not blurring anything, really. Please read my text. I do start to say “Does EXIF data like speed, aperture and ISO give enough information to replicate a picture?” And there is a good reason to write that: most people will mainly write that info – speed, aperture and ISO, sometimes lens focal length on their pictures. So that is all others get and that was my point. And EXIF does not always tell he truth even. But read on.

      I am aware of all the data a picture takes with it and also the data you can add to a picture (keywords, copyright, the whole IPTC that cab be add and helps agencies to work with pictures). I come from the days when we had to write that on paper and send along with the transparencies (I worked with FPG – New York back in the eighties… I am that old)

      EXIF, still does not tell the whole story, because if I keep all the data associated with the image but have edited the image before showing it, the end result will be different from what the EXIF info suggests, so people trying to get the same effect will in fact be mislead. I mention this also in my text.

      Remember this is a Quick Tip so I’ve no space to go into more detail. The idea with these tips is to make people THINK and discuss things. As we’re doing now. And so let me give you another example where the EXIF will lie: if you use an external flash controlled through a manual radio trigger, the EXIF will not reflect that use, and state that Flash Did Not Fire. So, again, it will be misleading.

      When saving for web in most programs most or all the data is gone. And if it is gone there’s no way you can find it on then pictures displayed on the web.

  • ChitraSivasankarArunagiri

    Now that is a pretty amazing eye opener. Great comparison. And I agree with the second opinion. EXIF can be a part of an elaborate explanation about how the shot was made. Great writing.

  • Thinkeye

    I’ve collected your questions and I’ll try give yout the answers from my (beginners) point of view.

    “Does EXIF data like speed, aperture and ISO give enough information to replicate a picture?”
    No, and this is not the purpose of sharing that information. See below.

    “… does sharing some of that info help others to learn photography?”
    Definitely yes. If you try to explain some exposure basics, or some nuances to educate others, it may help you to explain how you achieved the effect you are demonstrating. One of easiest ways of learning is imitation and reproducing to understand the art and make progress.

    “I just post my images on the web and state the exposure trio data, is that of much help to others?”
    Sometimes. Especially, if a flash, or filter is involved, or there were difficult lighting conditions to overcome, or you photographed something special like fireworks, or blurring a waterfall.

    “Is that enough for you to make similar images?”
    Repeated from above.

    “Now, do you still feel it is essential to share EXIF data with others?”
    It depends on what you are trying to explain. There is nothing about composition in EXIF. But if someone is studying exposure to improve his skills for difficult situations (bad light, lack of time, etc.) it can really help.
    Or if someone is shopping for a new camera, your info about vendor, model, lens, etc. combined with contents of your image (colours, noise etc.) may help them to make a better decision.

    “Or should it be part of a longer explanation that tells how the picture was created, from the taking moment to the editing in the computer?”

    Definitely. If you want to show (teach) something, use the EXIF data as a tool to make your point when needed.

  • http://yashmatunited.blogspot.com/ hardkoretom

    You used a bad example if you are talking about getting the same mood and lighting. Unless you live near a butterfly/moth farm, how are you supposed to recreate a shot with a caterpillar like that? A better example would have been a wedding or a landscape shot or some situation that is a bit more common than a macro shot. Every picture is technically like a snowflake, its practically impossible to recreate, so I think you’re missing the point if you are trying to recreate a photo. People continue to this day to recreate photos where Ansel Adams made his best work and I doubt there is anybody alive who could.

    I believe the EXIF information was made so people don’t have to carry a log book around with them. It is probably THE only advantage digital has over film. You seem to be taking it a bit too seriously. In one statement you say you are a photographer from the film days where you had to write everything down in a log (medium format and large format usually), and then you say “Some even go as far as saying that you can write down whatever you think the picture was taken at, an option that frightens me.” Well make up your damn mind. You can’t have it both ways, dude. You gotta remember you are using a digital camera. It doesn’t have the same capabilities that film does. I scanned about 30 negatives the other day. I didn’t keep a log and I’m almost certain I won’t be able to get any of those shots with the settings again. (Forget the fact that I don’t shoot 35mm film anymore and only shoot 6×7 now)

    A reason some people don’t store the exif might be for copyright concerns. A different one might be for file size. The possibilities could be endless. What’s the big deal about exif anyway? It doesn’t help me more than telling me which focal length I use the most on a zoom lens or for sorting. You are looking into something wayyyyy deeper than you probably should.