Let's Talk About Chimping....

In another thread a forum member mentioned chimping in a negative manner.. I thought you might like to read this as I have never felt chimping was negative but a positive learning aspect of digital photography... in the same sense that pros use to take Polaroid shots before the real thing.

From Wikipedia=============

Chimping is a colloquial term used in digital photography (especially when using a digital single-lens reflex camera) to describe the habit of checking every photo on the camera display (LCD) immediately after capture.

Some photographers use the term in a derogatory sense to describe the actions of wannabe or newbie photographers, but the act of reviewing images on-camera is not necessarily frowned upon by professional or experienced photographers.

Origin of the term

The term 'chimping' is attributed to Robert Deutsch, a USA Today staff photographer, in September of 1999 when writing a story for the SportsShooter email newsletter.

The phrase is most likely derived from comparison between the sounds and actions some make while reviewing images and those of an excited primate (Oooh! Oooh! Aaah!), or when a photographer is completely absorbed in the act of analysing, admiring or proudly displaying a shot to others.

Views on chimping

Stephen Johnson, in his book on digital photography, writes:

“ The implied pejorative [in the term 'chimping'] is shocking to me. If there's any one thing that is revolutionary in the advance of photography represented by this digital age, it is the ability to inspect your work. Ignore such ridicule, and use the tools to their fullest. ”

He further points out that using the LCD panel effectively means that a light meter can be left at home and if the shot isn't right, it can be tried again. Therefore, the idea that only "wannabe" photographers need to look at the LCD and check the exposure, image, or both may be unreasonable.

However, this activity can lead to missed photo opportunities, especially in fast-paced action scenarios. A photographer can be occupied looking at the previous shot rather than actively photographing a scene unfolding in front of them. This activity may also be a symptom of the photographer not understanding what they are doing and relying on instant feedback to see if they guessed well enough or not, hence possibly its association with "newbie" photographers.

End of definition ======================

Chimping is not a bad thing.. it is a way of learning much more rapidly than if using film.

It's a given that chimping during fast action sports and other scenarios when the action is fast unwinding can be a problem and result in missed shots.. but chimping in general helps one understand the interaction between ISO, shutter speed and aperture.... so don't let anyone tell you differently or attempt to make you feel less of a photographer because you chimp.

For all the info.. visit this link.. and the discussion tab on that page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimping

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com/m8
http://www.boxedlight.com/dlux4
http://www.boxedlight.com/dlux3
http://www.boxedlight.com/dp1
http://www.oceona.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear.... and remember, a camera is a tool, not a religion.

Chimping makes you go blind and grow hair on your palms.

Yes, pro's use polarids but not for every shot but the problem with chimpers, they look at every shoot. Shoot one check it and the histogram (only thing you real need to look at) and keep shooting.

I don't think it helps one learn about exposure, shutter speed, aperture or ISO. I do think it makes for lazy photographers, who don't understand about those things.

What you need to do is what my old flight instructor did the day he reached into his Jenson case and pulled out the big roll of masking tape and started tapping the instruments. I learned to fly the plane and not the needles. It should be the same with your camera. Tape out the LCD.

Learn to use your meta data when reviewing after the shot to see what worked and why not just like film shooters keep shooting notes.

--

'No matter how capable it may be, any camera you have to hold out in front of you like a tourist is not cool.'
Dean Forbes

I couldn't disagree with Stoval more.

The beauty of digital over film is that you can look at learn right on the spot and correct your mistakes. In film, you used to have to wait hours or days sometimes, to get a look at what you actually produced. Thy reason pros shoot Polaroids is to find out about lighting, composition and other elements of the shot they are about to take.

We can do instantly with out cameras. Call me a chimp...but I'll continue to monkey around with my LCD, thank you very much.

John Crawley
Lost somewhere in Texas

mental note.... never fly through clouds over mountains with stoval

there is a balance with chimping... every shot is bad... but the occasional sanity check is justified...either of the photgraph or the photographer
--
if you really must see my photos then try
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinparis2007/

It's a convenience that can offer two different things, a way to learn faster or become lazier. I don't think you can call it good or bad, because when it comes to technology, there have always been, are presently, and always will be payoffs for the comfort and convenience of newer technologies.

Human nature dictates that most people will fall into the latter catagory of getting lazier and sloppier when it comes to chimping. That's why it has negative conotations. The people who use it effectively will always be the exception. And it's clear that you, Jim, fall into that catagory of using it effectively and with discipline.
--

• markE

http://www.pbase.com/marke

'Good street/wildlife photography is a controlled accident,
a vision of preparation and surrender materialized.'

...and I'm a CHIMPER!

Well said Jim; there is nothing wrong with chimping, either as a training tool or for immediate reassurance. Let's face it - the camera's exposure evaluations, even if they are accurate, aren't necessarily what we envision before the shot is taken.

But while I often use the process for exposure evaluation, I use it more to improve the composition. Not just because of the inaccuracy of M8 framelines, but because of my own initial compositional feebleness. Chimping allows me to improve my distance, and allows for a more appropriate decentering of the point of interest.

Stovall's method would be more appropriate for me for street-photography, where getting the next shot may be more important than checking the last one. By extension therefore, fast-action imaging may suffer due to chimping.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12191517@N05/

Stovall said:

Chimping makes you go blind and grow hair on your palms.

Click to expand...

The line above is the only indication I have ever seen that indicates you have any sense of humor, John.. thanks for that.. but as for the rest you have written.. you quickly dropped back into character.

Stovall said:

Yes, pro's use polarids but not for every shot but the problem with
chimpers, they look at every shoot. Shoot one check it and the
histogram (only thing you real need to look at) and keep shooting.

Click to expand...

Reading the histogram does not always deliver the best results. I sometimes underexpose on purpose for mood and quite often what the camera sees is not what I want to capture. I often take a shot, check exposure and continue.. the problem with digital and film is that your meter and your mind don't always get it right... film gives you no opportunity to check.. digital does. It doesn't make you lazy, it makes you more aware of the light and the capability of your camera and it makes you a smarter photographer because you are using ALL the tools the camera provides.

Stovall said:

I don't think it helps one learn about exposure, shutter speed,
aperture or ISO. I do think it makes for lazy photographers, who
don't understand about those things.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely, 100%, totally.... incorrect, sir. As always you are welcome to your opinion but you're wrong.

Stovall said:

What you need to do is what my old flight instructor did the day he
reached into his Jenson case and pulled out the big roll of masking
tape and started tapping the instruments. I learned to fly the plane
and not the needles. It should be the same with your camera. Tape out
the LCD.

Click to expand...

Yeah, good luck with that under IFR rules..... I've never known anyone so opposed to using the advantages of a digital camera than you, John. You are stuck in the past and refuse to use what advances the digital technology brings. The above analogy does not fly... pardon the pun.

Stovall said:

Learn to use your meta data when reviewing after the shot to see what
worked and why not just like film shooters keep shooting notes.

Click to expand...

That is absurd. There's an old saying... hmmmm what is it? A picture is worth a 1000 words (meta data). I really can't believe that you believe what you are saying.

Stovall said:

'No matter how capable it may be, any camera you have to hold out in
front of you like a tourist is not cool.'

Click to expand...

Since when was photography about looking or being cool?

--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com/m8
http://www.boxedlight.com/dlux4
http://www.boxedlight.com/dlux3
http://www.boxedlight.com/dp1
http://www.oceona.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear.... and remember, a camera is a tool, not a religion.

I used to chimp a lot when first using the M8 but I found out early on that the LCD was only useful for checking my composition. The histogram is the main item I rely upon and I check that when I am in different lighting situations. Ideally, one should use a light meter I suppose but for street shots, the subjects usually don't appreciate having a meter thrust in front of their faces. You're right in that for some reason, chimping is regarded in a derogatory fashion but I dont think its a big deal though it is for others.
--

http://catatac.zenfolio.com

I should think that "chimping" would also refer to framing the picture using the LCD on cameras that have LIve View. This is especially useful for street photography with small sensor cameras; and is the way I have used the Ricoh GRD2. Although an external viewfinder is available for that camera I have preferred to frame with the LCD because it helped me achieve a looser shooting style than I had been using with the M6, a style that I value for street photography.

Some people feel that shooting this way is also "stealthier", but that is not the reason I've been doing it because, in any case, people see that you have a camera; it is rather that they take often you for a tourist and pay little attention to you, which helps to get pictures in which the subjects are not "posing" or looking at the photographer. I am not sure that I can be as loose and indirect with my M8.

—Mitch/Potomac, MD
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malland/sets/72157613189560804/

Well, I certainly don't see anything wrong with chimping. Why would you pay hundreds (or even thousands) of dollars for a camera with an LCD screen and a lot of other useful tools AND THEN NOT USE THEM? Doesn't make sense to me. How many times when you were shooting film did you miss a setting (ISO, for example) or have a roll of film not hook up and not feed properly? It happened to all of us--even the PROs--and we lost a bunch of shots. At that time we would have given anything to have some way of knowing what we were actually capturing. And now that we have the ability to monitor our progress as we shoot you think we should not? Give me a break!

If you want to shoot film that's fine. If you want to use a digital with out chimping that's fine, too. I don't care. Just don't put me down because I do.

The world has moved on. Digital is now the standard. As the old dinosaurs die off so will film fade away. And just to make things clear, I'm an old dinosaur as well--I'm going to be 63 in April--but I've adapted, thank you very much. I have a long history of association with film. My grandfather supported his family with a photography business for 15 years (till he went blind). My father was an avid amateur and I started shooting in the early 60s. I've put many a roll of film through many a camera (mostly K64 slides) since then and enjoyed myself very much. But shooting K64 got to be a hassle (both in finding film and getting it processed) and I really drifted away from photography in the late 80s. However, about about two years ago I went digital and I haven't looked back since. Because I can afford to spend a bit more on my habit I'm having more fun than I ever did.

Oh, and I don't have a problem using a camera without a viewfinder (such as my DP1). I care much more about how my images look than how I look when I'm taking them...

--
Look at the picture, not the pixels...
http://www.lkeithr.zenfolio.com

i too couldn't help myself "chimping" because i am still getting use to the difference in exposure from the D-lux4, between quick review and play-back mood; guess once i get the hang of it, i could go ahead to shoot more "smoothly" ... in my case "chimping" is indeed part of a learning curve.

Stovall said:

What you need to do is what my old flight instructor did the day he
reached into his Jenson case and pulled out the big roll of masking
tape and started tapping the instruments. I learned to fly the plane
and not the needles. It should be the same with your camera. Tape out
the LCD.

--

Click to expand...

Tape the LCD and shoot JPEG.....just like film.....no safety net, parachute or second chance.....LOL
--
Bob

Yes.. I forgot to mention how using a compact camera marks you as a non-threatening tourist.. allowing you to get shots you otherwise would never get.

The might M8, when held to the eye and pointed in the general direction of a sentient, carbon based lifeform tends to intimidate them.. and in some cases anger them... I have yet to see a compact camera have this effect on the natives.

By the way.. note the new signature... one link to my sites: http://www.boxedlight.com
--
Jim Radcliffe
http://www.boxedlight.com
http://www.oceona.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear.... and remember, a camera is a tool, not a religion.

I couldn't agree more. I'm a little intimidated when it comes to taking street shots but find it MUCH easier with my D-Lux 3 or DP1 than with a big DSLR...
--
Look at the picture, not the pixels...
http://www.lkeithr.zenfolio.com

Painters look at their work constantly, singers listen to playbacks of recordings, writers reread and edit but photographers are supposed to do it and move on? How about if photographers pull an Austin Powers and snap away then toss the camera to someone and move on ?

Jim Radcliffe said:

The might M8, when held to the eye and pointed in the general
direction of a sentient, carbon based lifeform tends to intimidate
them.. and in some cases anger them...

Click to expand...

LOL! Yes, it's not just the image of a harmless tourist that an LCD viewed camera provides, as you said it's maybe more so the fact that one is not sighting the camera as some modern-day Ernest Hemmingway while stalking his prey.

Member said:

By the way.. note the new signature... one link to my sites:
http://www.boxedlight.com

Click to expand...

It's book-marked as one of my favorites, Jim. First class site.

--

• markE

http://www.pbase.com/marke

'Good street/wildlife photography is a controlled accident,
a vision of preparation and surrender materialized.'

This post pretty much sums it all up, well said.
And anyway, it's a personal choice and depends on the circumstances.

mcshan said:

Painters look at their work constantly, singers listen to playbacks
of recordings, writers reread and edit but photographers are supposed
to do it and move on?

Click to expand...

...It's not what you do...It's how you do it.

When I shoot soccer (football) I seldom chimp. It's in the sports photography world where chimping is probably most derided -- and for good reason. You gotta stay in the game, not in the back of your camera. So I make a couple of test shots, shoot the first half, sit down during halftime and weed out the bad ones, shoot the second half, and then shoot the next game or head home. (There are exceptions -- notably shooters on tight deadline.)

Shooting around with other, less action-oriented subjects, I chimp more. It's nice to confirm that things are working.

That said, chimping may help you take a better photograph, but chimping does not necessarily make you a better photographer. There is something to be said for the deeper learning of shooting all day, going into the darkroom, and then having that sinking sensation...

Unless the photographer consciously transfers the information gained looking into the LCD into increased knowledge -- and thus changed behaviors at the start of the picture-making process -- the benefits gained from chimping are likely to be ephemeral. In my own experience with the M8, I have found that good metering practice (especially using an incident meter) learned over the decades, has it all over the camera' built-in meter. And the very act of metering focuses my attention on light values and how to get them under control. Thus chimping becomes less important.

If for some reason I was unable to play back pictures on the LCD, I have no doubt that I could do a good days work with the camera. If you can say that with confidence, chimping isn't much of an issue anymore.

Nope. Chimping is the examination of images on the LCD after the image is created.

You example is like calling the act of "writing" the same as "reading" because you are reading the letters as you write them. Chimping is compulsive reading of images already created.

mitchall said:

I should think that "chimping" would also refer to framing the
picture using the LCD on cameras that have LIve View.

Click to expand...

ljclark, sounds a bit pedantic to me: the word "chimping", as much as I hate it, comes from the image of a chimp holding up a camera in front of him, which is the action used whether framing and reviewing a picture. And the idea of "compulsive" has nothing to do with it.

—Mitch/Potomac, MD
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malland/sets/72157614162056564/