Just curious?? When chimping are the photos RAW or JPG?

[lmele]

As the title says when your chimping or checking the shots you have just taken, are the photos on the veiwing screen on the back of your camera in raw or jpeg, I'm just curious? :confused:

[PacAce]

JPG.

[steved110]

the camera translates the RAW file into a JPEG so you can see it on the monitor. A RAW file would not be viewable.
As an aside, I never bother to look at the picture on the camera screen anyway as invariably I can't see it properly in bright sunshine, and chimping is not a habit I ever aquired ( obviously!) with my film camera.
I know technically the histogram is useful regarding exposure, but the screen picture for me is too small to be any use when looking for sharpness. I wonder how the 30D crowd feel about this?

[nadtz]

Im pretty sure the LCD uses the embedded jpg info and doesnt render the raw file.

[PacAce]

the camera translates the RAW file into a JPEG so you can see it on the monitor. A RAW file would not be viewable.
As an aside, I never bother to look at the picture on the camera screen anyway as invariably I can't see it properly in bright sunshine, and chimping is not a habit I ever aquired ( obviously!) with my film camera.
I know technically the histogram is useful regarding exposure, but the screen picture for me is too small to be any use when looking for sharpness. I wonder how the 30D crowd feel about this?
If the 20D screen is too small for viewing the images, then so is the 30D screen. What's nice about the larger screen of the 30D is that for old folks like myself, the words are biggers and easier to see without needing reading glasses or squinting to make out the words. :)

I'm not 100% positive but I think there's more info displayed on the bigger the screen, at least compared to what I was getting on the 10D. Not sure if that change occurred with the 20D or with the 30D and the larger screen area, though.

[PacAce]

Im pretty sure the LCD uses the embedded jpg info and doesnt render the raw file.
How do you suppose the JPG info got there if the raw file wasn't rendered (processed)? ;)

[Titus213]

You can also use the screen to check for closed eyes, blocked faces, general composition. It is too small to show focus but can be zoomed for the other issues. The histogram is very useful IMO.

[bauerman]

Agree with Titus - why go digital if you are not going to use one of the BEST parts about digital - being able to see your work directly after it is captured? I would prefer to delete shots that did not turn out appropriately (as this only takes seconds) rather than wasting time downloading those bad shots; only to delete them later from my PC.

Plus - the histogram is a wonderful took for checking exposure - even in bright sun - I can see the histogram and tell if I have the proper exposure. Chimp away!

[PacAce]

Agree with Titus - why go digital if you are not going to use one of the BEST parts about digital - being able to see your work directly after it is captured? I would prefer to delete shots that did not turn out appropriately (as this only takes seconds) rather than wasting time downloading those bad shots; only to delete them later from my PC.

Plus - the histogram is a wonderful tool for checking exposure - even in bright sun - I can see the histogram and tell if I have the proper exposure. Chimp away!
Amen to that!!!! :)

[Tee Why]

It is the JPEG version of your shot. Even if you shoot only in RAW, it's a JPEG version so the settings such as contrast/saturation/etc can affect the histogram. So it's a good idea to leave the JPEG setting in Setting 2(I believe that has all the parameters to 0). The same goes for blown highlights, they sometimes can be recovered in RAW, although it maybe a touch blown in JPEG.

[lmele]

Thanx for clearing that up guys. I had a feeling it was jpeg ,but i was'nt 100% sure. So from my understanding , if the histogram looks ok it's a good bet that the raw version exposure is ok as well?
You can also use the screen to check for closed eyes, blocked faces, general composition
I also agree with Titus213 i always check to see if the eyes are open or moth is open or any other smaal thing that can spoil the shot

[jj1987]

How do you suppose the JPG info got there if the raw file wasn't rendered (processed)? ;)
using the embedded jpeg preview thats in every raw file.

[Tee Why]

Thanx for clearing that up guys. I had a feeling it was jpeg ,but i was'nt 100% sure. So from my understanding , if the histogram looks ok it's a good bet that the raw version exposure is ok as well?

I also agree with Titus213 i always check to see if the eyes are open or moth is open or any other smaal thing that can spoil the shot

I think it's a general rule of thumb. There's always exceptions but I think as long as you don't clip either the left or the right end, the exposure should be good.

[dpastern]

Amen to that!!!! :)

I'll 2nd this. The LCD is good for general composition checks, general quality checks, sharpness checks with the zoom (still very limited to a computer screen), and exposure information via the histogram.

Dave

[SmartImport]

using the embedded jpeg preview thats in every raw file.
That is the reason why the preview of a raw image has less quality than a jpeg and is more difficult to check for focus

Helmut

[Lester Wareham]

As the title says when your chimping or checking the shots you have just taken, are the photos on the veiwing screen on the back of your camera in raw or jpeg, I'm just curious? :confused:

The RAW file includes a low resolution JPG that the camera uses for display. The Canon software untilities also use it for thumbnails.

[PacAce]

using the embedded jpeg preview thats in every raw file.
Yes, I know that. My question was more of a rhetorical one for Nadtz. ;)

[20Duser]

If the 20D screen is too small for viewing the images, then so is the 30D screen.
Owning a 20D and having used a 30D I'd have to disagree. The difference in screen size makes the images so much more viewable. As has already been said why have the screen on the camera if you don't use it to check your shots.

[pknight]

Plus - the histogram is a wonderful took for checking exposure - even in bright sun - I can see the histogram and tell if I have the proper exposure. Chimp away!

Really? What camera are you using that you can see the histogram (or anything else, for that matter) in bright sunlight?

I just spent a week in Orlando, taking shots outdoors in bright light for the most part, and I would have had to run inside a building in order to see the histogram or the preview. This is on an XT, which has led me to wonder if the 30D screen is easier to view in bright sunlight. I know a lot of people have upgraded from the XT to the 30D, so perhaps a voice of experience can enlighten me.

[storeman]

Really? What camera are you using that you can see the histogram (or anything else, for that matter) in bright sunlight?


It all depends on the brightness settings of the lcd screen. Boosting this all the way up can make the screen viewable in bright sunlight with just a little shading plus some people use those screen protectors which provide some sun protection to the screen making it easier to see. I generally leave the brightness around the midway mark as too bright makes the preview look far better than the image actually is plus it is less of a drain on the batteries which gives me that extra few shots between battery changes.

As previously mentioned, having the ability to get a general idea of the image can be a blessing especially if you are running out of card space and don't have the ability to save your images to some form of storage. You can decide which are the really bad ones and delete them giving you a few more shots before having to pack i tin for the day.

[Tundrasport]

I find it very useful, especially when shooting dogs or other critters on the move. A lot of times I will shoot a burst while panning. Did I get him? Did I clip off an ear or a tail? I shoot....therefore I chimp...:p

[PacAce]

Owning a 20D and having used a 30D I'd have to disagree. The difference in screen size makes the images so much more viewable. As has already been said why have the screen on the camera if you don't use it to check your shots.
Yes, the larger screen does make the image much more viewable. However, it's still too small to tell if the image is in focus or not.

[Barb42]

Yes, the larger screen does make the image much more viewable. However, it's still too small to tell if the image is in focus or not.

That is true, at least in some cases. However, zooming in on the image and then turning on the histogram gives the shooter a much better chance at getting the settings right.

There are never guarantees, but one should always use the tools provided. It beats the heck out of guessing. I thought it was about getting the best shot possible and using every available tool is preferable over some ego trip about a made up issue. The very word 'chimping' is demeaning and could well prevent new shooters from developing their skills by using the LCD and the histogram. Those who condemn 'chimping' are helping no one. We should encourage people to use all the tools available and use them effectively.

[Mark Kemp]

Just wait till you go back to a film SLR and find yourself looking at the back wondering where the preview has gone, not so much chimp as chump!

[PacAce]

That is true, at least in some cases. However, zooming in on the image and then turning on the histogram gives the shooter a much better chance at getting the settings right.

There are never guarantees, but one should always use the tools provided. It beats the heck out of guessing. I thought it was about getting the best shot possible and using every available tool is preferable over some ego trip about a made up issue. The very word 'chimping' is demeaning and could well prevent new shooters from developing their skills by using the LCD and the histogram. Those who condemn 'chimping' are helping no one. We should encourage people to use all the tools available and use them effectively.
Man, it looks like a lot of people are taking my words out of context. All I said was that if the 20D screen is too small to do anything with, then the larger 30D screen would be too. I never said that it was useless nor did I say that one should not use the LCD screen. AAMOF, I have my LCD screen set to Info so that I can see the histogram and check the image for blinking highlights. And I do it all the time. :)

For the record, I think chimping has taking on a demeaning meaning, too, and has evolved into something way different from what the original meaning of the word probably was, from constant misuse, just like how the word "bokeh" has come to mean something totally different from the original meaning from so many people misusing the word so much.

[Titus213]

Use the tools. Having shot film for years it would have been real nice to get some idea of what I had just captured. But we shouldn't be 'guessing' either. We have good meters in our cameras and varying levels of experience that should always be called on. The lcd is a definite bonus that should be used. Mine is set to INFO too and I check it regularly during a shoot.

[jwkramer]

As the title says when your chimping or checking the shots you have just taken, are the photos on the veiwing screen on the back of your camera in raw or jpeg, I'm just curious? :confused:

why do they call it chimping?

[PacAce]

why do they call it chimping?
http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/chimping/

[jwkramer]

http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/chimping/

That's too funny... I thought it was an acronym for something! :oops:

[jwkramer]

Just wait till you go back to a film SLR and find yourself looking at the back wondering where the preview has gone, not so much chimp as chump!

what's a film SLR? :D

[Jon]

That's too funny... I thought it was an acronym for something! :oops:It is :
Can't
Help
Inspecting
My
Photos

[PacAce]

It is :
Can't
Help
Inspecting
My
Photos
LOL :lol: Ha-ha-ha :lol:

Good one, Jon.

[jfrancho]

It is :
Can't
Help
Inspecting
My
PhotosIf there were an award for best acronym, you'd be in the running for this one.

[Jon]

I'm with the gummint - we gotta be good at acronyms and retronyms. What can I say?