Haydon

I check the histogram primarily. Any tool that gives you a better shot shouldn't be ignored IMO.

DrWilk Loc: .

If you've travelled any distance or with any degree of cost or difficulty to get a photo, you'd be an idiot to take that photo and then not check to see if it was to your liking.
Chimp at least sometimes, by all means. That's what the damn screen is there for.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Isn't it amazing how the most trivial things can somehow become raging "controversies?"

I hadn't given this much thought, but here we go. Much of what I do involves experimenting with positioning and intensity (duration, actually) of lights, so "chimping" is part of the process. If I am shooting people (pretty rare) or landscapes I am hardly ever "chimping."

I do see people out and about who shoot, look, shoot, look, shoot, look. They are often taking pictures of themselves and each other, posed against various scenic views in vacation locations. I wouldn't begrudge them that, as they are having fun and it is a thrill for them to see that they have in fact captured something important to them, like their child smiling with the Grand Canyon, or whatever, in the background. Often they do seem to spend more time looking at their digital images then they do looking at the real thing. So be it.

"Chimp" away, folks, or not, it matters not to me, and I don't care whether or not I look like a professional - I'd rather not, actually, now that I think about it - and I get a big kick out of watching and chatting with the casual shooters out there "chimping" away to their heart's content.

Mike

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I chimp...but a lot of times you wouldn't know it as I do it through my viewfinder...a nice benefit of a mirrorless camera. I just look like I'm taking another picture.

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Thanks Everybody!!! We all (all!) seem to be on the same page!

So far the consensus seems to be that there is nothing wrong with checking the shot once in a while, and in fact (as long as you have the tool) it's silly not to. That's what I thought. I do suppose that in some fast-breaking situations there is no time to check, so you rely on your experience, but when there's a break in the action I see nothing wrong with going back through what you just shot to see if something needs a reshoot. :thumbup:

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

BTW, yes, real pros in the film days definitely, "chimped". It was called Polaroid!!
There was not one pro product photographer alive that did not chimp. When working under commercial deadlines(and all were shooting 4x5), "nobody", sent in for developing without a thorough Polaroid chimping first.
Amateurs didn't need to, but pros absolutely had to.
As for checking the sharpness on your dslr using the lcd, "anything" looks sharp on an lcd!! It's better than nothing but not good enough! For sharpness, you would have to shoot tethered. If you're a landscaper, you wouldn't even need to check, everything is always sharp at 100 feet!! :lol:
I have stopped using my Canon 5dmkll in favor of my crop camera for portraits since it has such a low focus keeper rate, yet on the lcd they all look sharp but aren't!
I've been chimping since Chiquita shipped the first banana!! :lol: :lol:
SS

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Purposeful chimping is alright. But chimping after every shot simply because of some irresistable urge to view the just captured image for no other reason than seeing it, is time wasting and a bad habit.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Ha! You got there just before I did. I've long been a fan of Helmut Newton's work, amongst his published works is a collection of the test polaroids... http://www.taschen.com/pages/en/catalogue/photography/all/05754/facts.helmut_newton_polaroids.htm

So we are clearly descended from some common ancestor of modern day chimps...

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Yep! Still have my 4x5 Polaroid back (I also still have my Pacemaker Speed Graphic and my old Graphic View II---can't let go). :?

Regarding checking sharpness, though, I always enlarge the image on the screen. I know the screen itself isn't that sharp, but I've learned to gauge whether it's in range. I know when I get back I can boost sharpness more, and I do, but so far I've found nothing that will save a picture that's just out of focus, so I check. :thumbup:

Oh by the way, "I've been chimping since Chiquita shipped the first banana!!" :lol: :lol: That IS funny!

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

I completely agree! :thumbup:

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

:lol: :thumbup:

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Totally depends. I don't look at every capture, especially if I'm doing wildlife. I'll chimp shortly after I get on a scene with some critter, but once I know everything is set, I only occasionally look. Most of the time it's to see if I got the shot or not :)

For landscapes, I chimp a lot more. Not just for exposure, but to really see if I like the composition. Sometimes a long look at a shot you're thinking of capturing has big benefits when it comes to dialing it in a little better. I can't tell you the number of times I've noticed something on the LCD that I missed in the viewfinder.

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

I chimp. - Dave

Quixdraw Loc: x

Pretty much what Steve said. I don't worry about looking cool taking pictures -- I worry about taking cool pictures.

jdubu Loc: San Jose, CA

I suppose I am chimping to a degree when I shoot interiors tethered to my laptop. I find it absolutely essential to properly arrange furniture, accessories, lighting, etc. Nothing would be worse than working for a client and blowing the whole session because I didn't take advantage of all the tools available.
When shooting events and for fun, I look to verify my settings are producing what I think I set them to capture. I usually only chimp again when I change settings or if the lighting or location changes. Otherwise, I am just trying for good focus, good backgrounds and composition.
If the subject or scene is static, I will chimp more.