Still Chimping

[BrianShaw]

+1

I think there's enough room in this World to allow everyone to choose how they operate rather than dogmatically decrying any one certain way of operating. But of course, I might be BLUE COLLAR to think this way; common scum that I am...

Is there a full moon out tonight?

Seems like every night is a full moon on the Internet...

 

[BrianShaw]

I tell my Intro to Digital students to look at the LCD after each shot and do an analysis; you would be a fool not to use such a tool, especially when you are just learning to understand exposure. I also have them bracket so that they can analyze exposures on the computer as they really don't know what a good exposure is yet. As they become more fluid we add the Histogram to appreciate highlights and dark tones.

I watch new students develop terribly exposed or blank rolls or rolls of poor focus or DoF. I don't listen to that blue-collar attitude that shooting without the LCD teaches you...fill in the blank here. It is a waste of time and materials. The digital students after 1 semester far outstrip the film students in their ability to handle a camera. The folk who can teach anything but film refuse to admit that. We just got rid of one of those, thank goodness.

Film folk don't have that facility. If they did from the git-go, they would be fools not to use it. If you don't use it now because you have a zillion years of experience, well, more power to ya. If you don't want to use it for any reason (look ma, no hands) that is up to you. To decry such a method as chimping is being small and smarmy. I'm not impressed. Sneering is not an argument.

I feel the same about using meters vs Sunny-16...

But this thread is more about odd behavioral habits that are hard to break even when they make no sense. Humans are funny animals sometimes.

 

[BrianShaw]

To "chimp" is sort of an abbreviation of "check image" - used with a bit of a derogatory tone by some.

It also has to do with the fact that many folks purse their lips while checking their image...

 

[logan2z]

To "chimp" is sort of an abbreviation of "check image" - used with a bit of a derogatory tone by some.

My understanding is that the term derived from the notion that people who 'chimp' make sounds like "ooh ooh ooh" as they look at their latest artistic masterpiece on the back of their camera When doing this they sound like a chimpanzee. That seems to be confirmed here.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I always look at the back of the camera after taking a photo and removing the holder, to recheck if focus shifted. Whenever I'm out with the dslr, I find myself constantly checking the back for focus. Blasted large format photography!

 

[runswithsizzers]

Recently, I have found it to be quite helpful to check the image, zoomed in to 100%, to see if my intended subject is in focus. Several times I have taken a second or third shot which allowed me to choose a slightly different focus point and greatly improve the result compared to the first shot. I don't really care if chimping is a derogatory term or not, if it helps me to get the results I want.

As for "blue collar" I think it can be derogatory, or not. Within the tribe, it can be a term of solidarity and respect for shared values. But it gets tricky when someone outside your tribe calls you that. BerkeleyMike makes an important point when he says the instant feedback you can get from reviewing your digital image is a huge benefit when learning photography. But I am surprised a college professor has not benefitted from a class in interpersonal communication where they teach you using "you" language and calling people names puts them on the defensive, which is a huge detriment to communication.

 

[StepheKoontz]

But this thread is more about odd behavioral habits that are hard to break even when they make no sense. Humans are funny animals sometimes.

That was my point. I press the shutter on my Leica IIIc, then hold the camera away and look at the leather covered back expecting to see a preview screen. A few minutes later, I do the same thing, knowing there is nothing there and laugh at myself.

 

[Luckless]

Thinking more about how I actually handle my cameras, I realize now that film gear is impacting my handling of my digital camera more than the other way around. - But I've rarely bothered to bring my digital camera out for anything in the last year or so.

I often find myself double checking two things on my 7D:

- How many frames do I have left on a 32GB memory card every now and then while on a photo walk, and it is consistently 800-900 more images left...
- What ISO am I on, and is it going to be suitable to get the shot I'm thinking of, or will I have to make plans to come back... [And then I remember I can freely bump it to 800, or 1600/3200 if I drop resolution, as needed... The lack of being able to drop it below 50 does however kind of bug me. I've never actually shot that low, but not having the option annoys me.]

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... I press the shutter on my Leica IIIc, then hold the camera away and look at the leather covered back expecting to see a preview screen. A few minutes later, I do the same thing, knowing there is nothing there and laugh at myself.

For fun, you can tape something on the back of your Leica, such as:

- photo of a chimpanzee grinning
- the words "GREAT SHOT!"
- a nice photo
- a photo of the back of a Sony A7R

 

[logan2z]

For fun, you can tape something on the back of your Leica, such as:

- photo of a chimpanzee grinning
- the words "GREAT SHOT!"
- a nice photo
- a photo of the back of a Sony A7R

 

[Vaughn]

Does chimping include checking the histogram after pushing the shutter button?

 

[Kino]

For fun, you can tape something on the back of your Leica, such as:

- photo of a chimpanzee grinning
- the words "GREAT SHOT!"
- a nice photo
- a photo of the back of a Sony A7R

Sounds like a good ETSY sticker to sell!

It would be fun to show anyone who asks to see the back of your camera after you take a shot. What a shock!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I noticed at a wedding the photographer constantly chimping especially when they took group shots. I think they were looking to see if everyone smiled. If not, they took additional shots until they got them all.

 

[jtk]

I shoot DSLR and Mirrorless and I almost never chimp. There are all sorts of practical reasons to chimp, fewer if one previsualizes.

 

[Sweetlou42]

Not sure if anyone was sneering - certainly not my intent.

I should apologize because I've discovered that how I write or say things often confuses people - sometimes to the exact opposite of what I mean. I will have to be more careful.

To this matter... I'm just not in the habit of looking at my photos after I made them. I agree this could be to my detriment. As you say - and I agree - there's no problem with people using all the tools at their disposal.

Well I definitely need all the help I can get!

 

[Cholentpot]

On the job and using artificial lighting you bet I check after a shot to see if I need my lights moved or adjusted. At an event I'll take 5 and quickly scroll through my shots to see if I need anything.

I have a review screen, I'm going to use it.

 

[jim10219]

I don't know why "chimping" has gotten such a bad rap. Personally, I believe it's just a bunch of old film guys who hate everything digital and wanted to come up with a derogatory term for people who can double check on location (something you can't do with film, which made them jealous). I chimp whenever I can, though often the sun is too bright or there isn't time, as I have to be immediately ready for another shot. But sometimes you catch something that you didn't see in the viewfinder, and realize you need to take another shot, or you find a better composition within your original composition. You never know. But double checking your own work shouldn't be considered wrong, unless it's interfering with your work. Chimping is one of the biggest advantages of using a digital camera. Why throw that away?

I love film. I love digital. I love hybrid workflows. Each method has advantages and disadvantages, and I try to enjoy each for what they are, and don't feel the need to compare them directly. To me, applying the mindset of one process to another is a huge mistake. That's like trying to hammer a screw.

 

[MattKing]

One of the concerns with chimping is that even the best screens don't always give you the information you think they do.
Not that the information isn't useful, but rather that it can be misleading.
If having a quick peak afterwards on a small screen leads you to being sloppy in your execution - a version of "I can fix it in post" I guess - then having the screen available is a mixed blessing.
There is a flow to photography, and I find looking at the screen frequently can disrupt that flow for me. I don't want to remove the screen from the back of my camera, but I often prefer not to look at it any more than necessary.

 

[Luckless]

I don't want to remove the screen from the back of my camera, but I often prefer not to look at it any more than necessary.

A useful lesson that can take some of us longer to learn than it probably should have. I wasted a lot of time trying to "check" images on a crappy screen in awkward lighting conditions for viewing it long after I should have been able to trust my abilities to use a camera.

I mainly use the screen on my digital camera for the histogram and blinkies, rather than detailed inspection of composition at this point. I'll sometimes double check for background issues and critical focus, but I'm mostly worried about whether or not I've gotten information captured for the regions I really care about in the image.

 

[NB23]

I never chimp, not even with digital.

 

[BrianShaw]

I never chimp, not even with digital.

That’s very impressive self-control!

 

[Cholentpot]

One of the concerns with chimping is that even the best screens don't always give you the information you think they do.
Not that the information isn't useful, but rather that it can be misleading.
If having a quick peak afterwards on a small screen leads you to being sloppy in your execution - a version of "I can fix it in post" I guess - then having the screen available is a mixed blessing.
There is a flow to photography, and I find looking at the screen frequently can disrupt that flow for me. I don't want to remove the screen from the back of my camera, but I often prefer not to look at it any more than necessary.

Having distracting elements or weird shadows will show up on any screen regardless of quality. Mirrorless shooters have histogram and everything else right in the viewfinder. You can say a mirrorless shooter is always chimping.

I tend to look after a set of shots. Shoot a couple, or a scene and quick check while the subject is available.

 

[Wallendo]

I routinely look at the back of my film cameras ... and get mad at myself for not labeling the camera with the film it contained.

 

[MattKing]

I routinely look at the back of my film cameras ... and get mad at myself for not labeling the camera with the film it contained.

Painter's tape and a sharpie are your friend!

 

[MattKing]

Mirrorless shooters have histogram and everything else right in the viewfinder. You can say a mirrorless shooter is always chimping.

Unless they turn those features off.
I do a fair amount of "pre-chimping" - most of my digital shots are taken using the 2 second self timer. I press the shutter release then spend the next two seconds ensuring that I am as still as practical, and that there isn't something in the scene I want changed.
Only useful for static subjects of course, but it suits my approach.