Probably because to most, it doesn't matter. Either from viewers who are just interested in the artistic side of it or from the artists themselves who don't believe the technical details are all that important. Plus, such detailed technical specs could clutter the layout of a photobook and detract from the central element of it - the actual photos. There may also be those who believe their process is 'theirs' and thus they feel the need to keep it to themselves. There are examples of this in pop culture, look at Breaking Bad for example. Egos can very easily get in the way of things.

Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
hi stone

i think the reason photographers who publish books never include anything
about camera, film technque, lighting, paper, developers &c is because
well, most people don't really care about the details. the general public
who buys books with photographs in them only really care about the imagery
they couldn't care less about anything else. ( do books on painting list materials or paper ? )
photographers or aspiring photographers on the other hand, that is mainly what they care about
how an image was made, the film, paper, chemistry "chi" technique, light placement, gobox, modifiers and lights
and everything else ....

just like looking at images at a museum or gallery ... photographers ( film photographers ? ) put their nose as close to the glass as possible
to look at the details &c and have no concept of viewing distance .. it is kind of embarrassing ...


personally, i don't really care about what kind of film, paper, lights and all the technical "stuff"
because to me the "chi" is the image, now all the crap used to make it...

YMMV
I thought I was the only one who did this!