We appear to be discussing two different aspects of photography here, firstly the whole creative process, including post-processing as suggested by walwyn's Ansel Adams example, and secondly, the usefulness of basic capture information that can be used as a learning tool by the amateur and beginner.
Certainly I used to keep records in a notebook of settings used for a specific reel of film if I was trying to learn a particular technique or effect. It was the only way I could really learn about how much impact the settings had on the final image when I got the film back from the lab, I had to be very careful that the prints stayed in order until I'd annotated the settings on the back of the prints. This wasn't the norm for me, I used it to help my learning process. If I change the aperture by one stop, really, how much impact does that have on the DoF for that particualr focal length? Likewise, how slow do I need to set the shutter to freeze the motion of a particular subject?
This is the great benefit of EXIF, all the information I need is readily to hand. Certainly, as Mrs Y has taken up the camera again after a break of a few years, it has helped her learn about the effect of the basic settings used.
So, you can dial in the same camera settings, take two identical captures, post process (film or digital) to your heart's content, and produce two very different pictures with identical EXIF (or notes in film photographers notebook). In this case, the settings may not be of much value - though Clive's excellent reply shows that regardless of post processing, it is of some value.
It's an excellent resource for learning the craft, I'd hate to be without it.
Regards,
Duncan
|