Do you think chimping is “unprofessional,” that “real” photographers don’t 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 it’s 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 it’s 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 they’re 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 I’m 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. That’s chimping, is it not? I did not know a single studio pro who didn’t 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 don’t do it after every shot, but sometimes I’ll sit in the shade and review shots. I don’t 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. That’s sort of full-time chimping I guess, and I’m not sure any or all DSLR’s can do it (mirrorless may be able to). But I’m getting instant feedback with my eye to the finder and I think that’s 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 don’t.) :mrgreen: :lol:

Do you think chimping is “unprofessional,” that “real” photographers don’t 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 it’s 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 it’s 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 they’re 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 I’m 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. That’s chimping, is it not? I did not know a single studio pro who didn’t 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 don’t do it after every shot, but sometimes I’ll sit in the shade and review shots. I don’t 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. That’s sort of full-time chimping I guess, and I’m not sure any or all DSLR’s can do it (mirrorless may be able to). But I’m getting instant feedback with my eye to the finder and I think that’s 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 don’t.) :mrgreen: :lol:

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.

It is better to chimp than to get home and find something wrong. It is easy to forget to reset things, forget to switch back to auto focus or to forget to switch focus points back from spot to your normal setting. It would be useful if manufacturers would put a button on the back of the camera for a quick reset to favourite settings.

I use Live view for close ups on a tripod when I cannot get my eye to the viewfinder - but I cannot get used to seeing people with an expensive DSLR and holding it at arms length while using the Live view.

As for it being unprofessional, of course it is not - a pro will use whatever tools are available when necessary, and with tricky lighting situations, for instance, where there might be a question about how well the metered exposure worked, to be able to take a look, even with the limitations a JPEG derivation of the raw file entails, can be most useful.

It almost seems like a modern-day version of the argument decades ago that "real" photographers don't need motor drives, because they know the precise moment to release the shutter and didn't need the crutch of getting 8 exposures in a second.