To Chimp, or Not to Chimp, That Is The Question (Page 6): Exactly!

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

CatMarley wrote:

You guys are hysterical! Who bloodly well CARES if you look like a "professional"? Is that why you are taking pictures, to LOOK professional? Who are you trying to impress? Is a camera the new chick magnet? Aren't you out there trying to capture a moment in time, a face, an object that will never look the same again. So who cares what You look like doing it?

Exactly!

streetmarty Loc: Brockton, Ma

CatMarley wrote:

You guys are hysterical! Who bloodly well CARES if you look like a "professional"? Is that why you are taking pictures, to LOOK professional? Who are you trying to impress? Is a camera the new chick magnet? Aren't you out there trying to capture a moment in time, a face, an object that will never look the same again. So who cares what You look like doing it?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

No, I do not consider chimping "unprofessional." I do consider though that it could make us loose some opportunities.
For those of us who come from using film for so many years except for unusual lighting conditions chimping is not absolutely necessary. I do chimp occasionally but it is not a habit unless my subject is stationary and I do need to nail the shot, p. e portraits.
Chimping is another tool like it is looking at the color histogram. It certainly does not hurt to try to make sure of what we are doing.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

CHOLLY wrote:

Shows how easy it is to operate Nikon cameras. ;)

Stupid is what stupid says. Looks more like a selfie Cholly? Do you ever get tired of trolling the community with crap?

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

CatMarley wrote:

You guys are hysterical! Who bloodly well CARES if you look like a "professional"? Is that why you are taking pictures, to LOOK professional? Who are you trying to impress? Is a camera the new chick magnet? Aren't you out there trying to capture a moment in time, a face, an object that will never look the same again. So who cares what You look like doing it?

:lol: :lol: :lol: I agree, Cat. The thing is, somebody came up with the whole chimpanzee ookookook metaphor because they were laughing at us looking at our LCD's, and :oops: who wants to be laughed at? I don't even use a professional camera so I don't actually care, but I only asked the question to see how many of us do "IT." Almost 100% it turns out. :) So I just wish somebody would come up with a term OTHER than "chimping" for making good use of a valuable tool. :hunf:

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Oh this is a new use of "chimping." I always used it to mean cutting corners on stuff. Like you need a 2x4 for a job, but settle on a 1.5x3 because its just lying there and why spend the bread for the real thing.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

John_F wrote:

Oh this is a new use of "chimping." I always used it to mean cutting corners on stuff. Like you need a 2x4 for a job, but settle on a 1.5x3 because its just lying there and why spend the bread for the real thing.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

John_F wrote:

Oh this is a new use of "chimping." I always used it to mean cutting corners on stuff. Like you need a 2x4 for a job, but settle on a 1.5x3 because its just lying there and why spend the bread for the real thing.

I remember that use of the word! But I haven't heard it used for a long time (showing our age). :mrgreen: But I did a search and while I can find lots of alternate definitions, the main one (unfortunately) is the photographic one. :hunf:

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Chuck_893 wrote:

Do you think chimping is unprofessional, that real photographers dont do it and laugh at those that do? (I did a search and there seems not have been much discussion about this on the 'Hog.)

For the uninitiated, chimping is generally defined as the act of checking a just-taken picture on the LCD screen of your camera. The origin and etymology of the term is not clear, but its generally taken as pejorative inasmuch as it implies that one or more persons are gazing stupidly at your screen and making chimp noises, as in Oooo oooo oooo

Pejorative or not, chimping is simply checking your image on the LCD. It is argued (especially by street and event photographers) that if you do it after every single shot you are missing other shots, and I cannot argue with that. But its often implied, if not outright stated, that REAL photographers simply do not chimp! REAL photographers came up in film and had bloody better know what theyre doing because chimping is impossible with a film camera. That is also true.

Full disclosure: I chimp. I am not ashamed of it. I consider it just another tool, available to digital photographers. I love it. I came up in film. I know what Im doing. But when in the studio I often used Polaroid backs in my view cameras to insure that I had the lighting and exposure right. Thats chimping, is it not? I did not know a single studio pro who didnt do that at least some of the time.

I don't chimp every shot. We go places and do things. We spend a lot of $$$ to get there. I may not ever get back. Getting the picture right the first time is important. I chimp to check exposure and composition, and above all sharpness! I love that I can do that. I dont do it after every shot, but sometimes Ill sit in the shade and review shots. I dont scratch or make chimp or monkey noises. :lol:

More full disclosure: I use compact cameras that are always in live view. I take full advantage of that. My Nikon P7800 has an electronic viewfinder that I usually have showing everything: histogram, level, and briefly, right after exposure, a freeze-frame of what it got. Thats sort of full-time chimping I guess, and Im not sure any or all DSLRs can do it (mirrorless may be able to). But Im getting instant feedback with my eye to the finder and I think thats wonderful! I still double-check at some point, mostly to insure sharpness. I will sometimes switch to the blinkies view, mostly because I hate blown highlights. Checking every shot is probably overkill, but why not use every tool you have?

Well, I never know when to shut up :D So what do you think? Is chimping unprofessional, and do you care? (Cuz I dont.) :mrgreen: :lol:

Do you think chimping is unprofessional, that r... (show quote)

It does not matter what anybody else thinks, its you that matters. I chimp if I shoot some challenging scene (light etc.) to check if I got close to what I want it to look, but usually I do not use the back LCD.

Ralloh Loc: Ohio

Chuck_893 wrote:

Do you think chimping is unprofessional, that real photographers dont do it and laugh at those that do? (I did a search and there seems not have been much discussion about this on the 'Hog.)

For the uninitiated, chimping is generally defined as the act of checking a just-taken picture on the LCD screen of your camera. The origin and etymology of the term is not clear, but its generally taken as pejorative inasmuch as it implies that one or more persons are gazing stupidly at your screen and making chimp noises, as in Oooo oooo oooo

Pejorative or not, chimping is simply checking your image on the LCD. It is argued (especially by street and event photographers) that if you do it after every single shot you are missing other shots, and I cannot argue with that. But its often implied, if not outright stated, that REAL photographers simply do not chimp! REAL photographers came up in film and had bloody better know what theyre doing because chimping is impossible with a film camera. That is also true.

Full disclosure: I chimp. I am not ashamed of it. I consider it just another tool, available to digital photographers. I love it. I came up in film. I know what Im doing. But when in the studio I often used Polaroid backs in my view cameras to insure that I had the lighting and exposure right. Thats chimping, is it not? I did not know a single studio pro who didnt do that at least some of the time.

I don't chimp every shot. We go places and do things. We spend a lot of $$$ to get there. I may not ever get back. Getting the picture right the first time is important. I chimp to check exposure and composition, and above all sharpness! I love that I can do that. I dont do it after every shot, but sometimes Ill sit in the shade and review shots. I dont scratch or make chimp or monkey noises. :lol:

More full disclosure: I use compact cameras that are always in live view. I take full advantage of that. My Nikon P7800 has an electronic viewfinder that I usually have showing everything: histogram, level, and briefly, right after exposure, a freeze-frame of what it got. Thats sort of full-time chimping I guess, and Im not sure any or all DSLRs can do it (mirrorless may be able to). But Im getting instant feedback with my eye to the finder and I think thats wonderful! I still double-check at some point, mostly to insure sharpness. I will sometimes switch to the blinkies view, mostly because I hate blown highlights. Checking every shot is probably overkill, but why not use every tool you have?

Well, I never know when to shut up :D So what do you think? Is chimping unprofessional, and do you care? (Cuz I dont.) :mrgreen: :lol:

Do you think chimping is unprofessional, that r... (show quote)

I hate the word "chimping". There is absolutely nothing wrong with checking your results on your lcd after taking a shot. That way you spot possible over or under exposures, focusing problems, composition, and a host of other possible errors. You can then make adjustments and re-take. Those who claim they never do it are either lying or they are such elitists that they believe they can do no wrong with every shot they take. To each his own.

flathead27ford Loc: Colorado, North of Greeley

I am not ashamed to admit I chimp. Not every shot, but a lot of them. I have seen many videos of professional photographers and they chimp as well. One that comes to mind is Tony Northrop. :-) Cheers.

Rick from NY Loc: Sarasota FL

Rongnongno wrote:

No, use them with caution once you know that the information is let's say 'inaccurate'.

While you may be right in the fact that the histo just pertains to the jpeg (I never actually knew that), for me it is an essential tool that I use regularly. If the histo for my jpeg climbs either the left or the right wall, I know I need to dial in some exposure adjustment. If the jpeg histo is improved, it can only improve the raw file as well. I consider the histo to be the second best thing in digital photography. Makes my post processing much simpler.

As far as chimping - I agree that what one does or does not do makes no difference and has no relevance as to whether one is a "professional". I do chimp for must have shots or whenever the light is changing, but I almost never chimp when shooting sideline sports or other fast moving situations. I used to when I first switched to digital, but soon realized that I was missing too many opportunities while looking at the screen. Now, in fast action situations, I sneak a peak at my histo during lulls in the action to make sure that my exposure settings are still "correct". When I do chimp, my concern is seldom framing; it is exposure that I am concerned with.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

I have been in the field with pros all over the world for nearly thirty years, and of course they review their shots. Not to do so in situations where there is time to do so would be the essence of unprofessionality. You show up back in the office without the shot and you are dead meat.

In more controlled conditions, such as in sports stadiums, most guys will do a quick series of test shots to check for any unexpected results. Once they know they are good, they will trust the gear, as time in such situations is often of the essence.

Whether to review shots depends on multiple factors, but everyone I know will do so at least part of the time, as the situation permits.

As far as I am concerned, anyone who would risk shots because of worry about how they would look should have their head examined.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

I chimp when shooting macro at life size. Since macro involves such narrow DOF, I want to make sure I got the focus nailed. Plus since I shoot entirely in manual most times I check the image to make sure the exposure is where I want it. Shooting other than macro, or with AF lenses, I resort to viewing the Screen much less. Oh, back in film days, with larger format cameras anyway, they sold Polaroid backs so you could check your shots before shooting it on regular film. You didn't always have the opportunity to reshoot subjects...

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

Crwiwy wrote:

My understanding is that the term 'Chimping' came from those who - after taking a picture - looked at the screen and made noises like a Chimp....

This I completely agree with, and is also the definition in the urban dictionary. In this context I would doubt that any UHH member actually chimps except on very rare occasions, but they do periodically review images for all sorts of good reasons.

Reviewing is reviewing.

Chimping is best applied to people who look at pretty much every shot they have taken, and frequently say things like "Ooo, Ooo, ooo!, what a great shot, I got so lucky!" or something similar.

If we accept that definition, how many people still think that they chimp? No need to answer here, just to yourselves.

On the other hand, if you do actually chimp, leap up and down while making screeching or ooo -ooo- ooo noises, perhaps you would be kind enough to post a video of yourself in action! :D :D