I look, or chimp, every shot i take.
Pentax or Nikon.
I check the histogram, overall look of the photo, etc.
I DON'T make the sound though.:-)
Dave
On 11/14/07, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
I like chimping ;-). (Like - I am alcoholic) But I am curious ;-).
Well, seriously
,[iter, so I can cable USB from a powered hub to the
camera and display it on my 21 monitor.
Paul
On Nov 15, 2007, at 6:16 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
How about shooting tethered to your laptop review
Tom C wrote:
It seems to me the term is now used often in a euphemistic derogatory
sense that implies one must not be a good photographer if they need to
look at their image to check it. [...]
While I generally agree with what you're saying, Tom, I find it quite
scary, and more than a
I don't think that checking histograms counts as chimping, though.
Could be right. I thought looking at the LCD in general, was chimping.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
How about shooting tethered to your laptop review that way?
I don't have the Remote Assistant for the K10 (is there such a beast)
operational, and I believe I would need to upgrade the firmware
looking at a corner of
as the frame. ugh. Probably didn't
as have a decent shot anyway. sigh.
as ann
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:36:00 -0600
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: A question about
On Nov 15, 2007, at 3:16 PM, William Robb wrote:
How about shooting tethered to your laptop review that way?
I don't have the Remote Assistant for the K10 (is there such a beast)
operational, and I believe I would need to upgrade the firmware and
give up
the ability to play with the AF
- Original Message -
From: Ken Waller
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
I don't think that checking histograms counts as chimping, though.
Could be right. I thought looking at the LCD in general, was chimping.
I haven't used a flash meter or colour meter since I started using
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough confidence in their knowledge and abilities.
experience, and tools/techniques that lead to reproducable results?
You're right, it's a hallmark of many pro's to check and review their
images on the spot in order to correct
image immediately after exposure, is to a
photographer, probably the single largest advantage offered by the technology.
Tom C.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:36:00 -0600
- Original Message -
From: Tom
On Nov 15, 2007 11:33 PM, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think the review screen is as useful a tool as Polaroids, it's just
too easy to miss stuff on the smallish screen. It's really no better than
the viewfinder in many respects. I'm taking the files to the 21 desktop
screen
- Original Message -
From: Axel Belinfante
of course, that studio usage may have been only a small part of
the total polaroid usage.
Polaroid backs are rather big, clunky and inconvenient. They really only
worked well in studio use, where lighting tends to not change until someone
P. J. Alling wrote:
Chimping is a bit different from reviewing, it usually includes sound
effects something like, Ooh, Ooh, Ooh, looitthis. Ooh, Ooh... ;-)
I think it has the looser interpretation now - the key being reviewing
the shot reight after shooting or
close to it. sometimes the words
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough confidence in their knowledge and abilities.
You're right, it's a hallmark of many pro's to check and review
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough confidence in their knowledge and abilities.
You're right, it's a hallmark of many pro's to check and review their
images on the spot in order
.
ann
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:36:00 -0600
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough confidence
to preview and can make
the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one.
Tom C.
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:00:22 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Tom C wrote:
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough
If you don't occasionally chimp for exposure settings (overall R G B),
you're a lot better photographer then I am.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: ann sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Tom C wrote
Ken Waller wrote:
If you don't occasionally chimp for exposure settings (overall R G
B),
you're a lot better photographer then I am.
I don't think that checking histograms counts as chimping, though.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
,
but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Tom C
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
, and to get it right one must see.
Or one must have enough confidence in their knowledge and abilities.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
- Original Message -
From: Bob Blakely
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
I recently shot a hockey game (Ducks vs. Sharks). The first thing I did was
shoot an example shot from my view point. This gave me the info I needed
to:
1.Correct color temperature.
2.Correct
- Original Message -
From: Tom C
Subject: RE: A question about chimping
My point was that it's far better than having nothing to preview and can
make the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one.
It can as easily be the difference between getting a crappy shot
My point was that it's far better than having nothing to preview and can
make the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one.
It can as easily be the difference between getting a crappy shot and an even
crappier one, depending on what you are not photographing while you
-
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
How about shooting tethered to your laptop review that way?
I don't have the Remote Assistant for the K10 (is there such a beast)
operational, and I believe I would need to upgrade the firmware and
give up
the ability to play
- Original Message -
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
On Nov 15, 2007, at 3:16 PM, William Robb wrote:
How about shooting tethered to your laptop review that way?
I don't have the Remote Assistant for the K10 (is there such a beast)
operational
In a message dated 11/15/2007 8:50:58 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point was that it's far better than having nothing to preview and can
make the difference between getting a good shot and not getting one.
Tom C.
==
Especially when one is in a
Thanks. But then again what are these settings of sharpening and
contrast that you set so that histogram is as close as possible to the
RAW data?
Boris
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
If you leave the JPEG settings at full resolution and normal
defaults, approximately 8-12x will be close to 1:1
On Nov 14, 2007 6:20 PM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. But then again what are these settings of sharpening and
contrast that you set so that histogram is as close as possible to the
RAW data?
The in camera contrast, saturation sharpening settings?
Press Menu, and they're
On Nov 14, 2007 2:30 PM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
I like chimping
Mark!
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the
On Nov 14, 2007, at 2:50 AM, David Savage wrote:
On Nov 14, 2007 6:20 PM, Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. But then again what are these settings of sharpening and
contrast that you set so that histogram is as close as possible to
the
RAW data?
The in camera contrast,
Thanks for this. Good info. I hadn't realized that the jpeg settings affected
the histogram.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 14, 2007, at 2:50 AM, David Savage wrote:
On Nov 14, 2007 6:20 PM, Boris Liberman
Just FYI:
The reason for this is that the histogram and saturation blinkies are
calculated from the preview JPEG embedded in the RAW file.
Godfrey
On Nov 14, 2007, at 7:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for this. Good info. I hadn't realized that the jpeg
settings affected the
Indeed, I often noticed that whatever is blinking on camera screen is
not blinking in the LR ;-).
Boris
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Just FYI:
The reason for this is that the histogram and saturation blinkies are
calculated from the preview JPEG embedded in the RAW file.
Godfrey
--
PDML
What the hell is chimping?
Regards,
Bob...
--
Gort, klaatu barrada nikto!
-- Guess the author!
-- Guess the source!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
Bob, chimping is the process of reviewing the photographs just taken on
the small screen of your digital camera. It has the same root as word
chimp-anzee...
Boris
Bob Blakely wrote:
What the hell is chimping?
Regards,
Bob...
--
Gort, klaatu barrada nikto!
looking at the (digital) photos you just took to check you got it right.
the joke being if you like it you are going oooh oooh imitating the
sound a chimp makes.
ann
Bob Blakely wrote:
What the hell is chimping?
Regards,
Bob...
--
Gort, klaatu barrada nikto!
--
Reviewing the shot(s) on my digital camera is the same as shooting a
Polaroid, only more efficient!
Chimping. It sounds like a term a photo luddite would coin.
Regards,
Bob...
--
Gort, klaatu barrada nikto!
-- Guess the author!
-- Guess the source!
From: Boris
Bob Blakely wrote:
Chimping. It sounds like a term a photo luddite would coin.
It's more obvious when you're at an event or a happening or something
and you see a whole group of photogs doing it all at the same time.
Definitely shades of oohh, oohh, aahh, aahh when you're seeing it
happen
On Nov 15, 2007 8:02 AM, Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reviewing the shot(s) on my digital camera is the same as shooting a
Polaroid, only more efficient!
Chimping. It sounds like a term a photo luddite would coin.
If the video that Cotty posted some time ago is to be believed, the
And once again, here ya go!
http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/chimping/index.html
Bob Blakely wrote:
What the hell is chimping?
Regards,
Bob...
--
Gort, klaatu barrada nikto!
-- Guess the author!
-- Guess the source!
--
The difference
Chimping is a bit different from reviewing, it usually includes sound
effects something like, Ooh, Ooh, Ooh, looitthis. Ooh, Ooh... ;-)
Bob Blakely wrote:
Reviewing the shot(s) on my digital camera is the same as shooting a
Polaroid, only more efficient!
Chimping. It sounds like a term a
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 03:02:09PM -0800, Bob Blakely wrote:
Reviewing the shot(s) on my digital camera is the same as shooting a
Polaroid, only more efficient!
Chimping. It sounds like a term a photo luddite would coin.
I believe it came from the exact opposite end of the spectrum -
a
On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Bob Blakely wrote:
What the hell is chimping?
A disparaging description of checking the LCD that arose out of film
camera users envying digital camera users the ability to check their
exposures instantaneously.
Godfrey
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Reviewing the shot(s) on my digital camera is the same as shooting a Polaroid,
only more efficient!
Chimping. It sounds like a term a photo luddite would coin.
Regards,
Bob...
---
It seems to me the term is now used often in a euphemistic derogatory sense
that implies one
That's definitely monkey business. :-)
Tom C.
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 23:26:07 -0500
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: A question about chimping
Tom C wrote:
It seems to me the term is now used often in a euphemistic derogatory
sense that implies one must
Hi!
I like chimping ;-). (Like - I am alcoholic) But I am curious ;-).
Well, seriously now. On K10D one may zoom in as much as 20x into the
image. Can anyone tell me what does it mean in terms of looking at the
photo on the computer screen? And what is K10D equivalent of 100%?
Thanks.
Boris
If you leave the JPEG settings at full resolution and normal
defaults, approximately 8-12x will be close to 1:1 pixel resolution
for checking sharpness.
Since I capture exclusively in RAW format, I set JPEG settings to
minimum size, sharpening and contrast so that the histogram is as
47 matches
Mail list logo
