Lost lock function

[Bardot]

Hi, Still getting to know my new Z6 II. I'm unable to find the image lock function. Does the camera have it or is it absent on this model.????
Despite having spent 30 years or so with good old film cameras I'm still very trigger happy with digital. I often find myself shooting several hundred or more images on a shoot. I find it helpful to quickly asses them on the camera back . I scroll through and simply hit the lock button on any looking promising then simple use delate all to clear the rest. This is so much faster than deleting individual images as you assess or saving everything for assessment later. How do others decide on keepers?

 

[JANuser]

If you are on the image you want you save to hit the "i" button, which brings up a menu. One of the items is protect, this locks and unlocks images as desired.

 

[Bardot]

If you are on the image you want you save to hit the "i" button, which brings up a menu. One of the items is protect, this locks and unlocks images as desired.

Many Many Thanks JANuser.

 

[RickW]

Hi, Still getting to know my new Z6 II. I'm unable to find the image lock function. Does the camera have it or is it absent on this model.????
Despite having spent 30 years or so with good old film cameras I'm still very trigger happy with digital. I often find myself shooting several hundred or more images on a shoot. I find it helpful to quickly asses them on the camera back . I scroll through and simply hit the lock button on any looking promising then simple use delate all to clear the rest. This is so much faster than deleting individual images as you assess or saving everything for assessment later. How do others decide on keepers?

I can’t help you with the lock question, but I will suggest that you stop deleting images on your card based upon chimping the images on you camera screen. Memory is very inexpensive and the only sure way to evaluate the quality of a shot is to view it on a “real” monitor. The “poor” image you see in camera is NOT necessarily a poor image. It’s a jpeg viewed on a tiny screen. You’d be surprised how many “poor” images can be turned into keepers by applying editing to open shadows, tame overly bright areas, adjusting color balance, yadda yadda . Not to mention, who has time to review hundreds of shots while photographing? Concentrated on the photography and cull the images in post.

 

[Bardot]

I can’t help you with the lock question, but I will suggest that you stop deleting images on your card based upon chimping the images on you camera screen. Memory is very inexpensive and the only sure way to evaluate the quality of a shot is to view it on a “real” monitor. The “poor” image you see in camera is NOT necessarily a poor image. It’s a jpeg viewed on a tiny screen. You’d be surprised how many “poor” images can be turned into keepers by applying editing to open shadows, tame overly bright areas, adjusting color balance, yadda yadda . Not to mention, who has time to review hundreds of shots while photographing? Concentrated on the photography and cull the images in post.

Don't get me wrong Rick I would not be deleting anything if the subject was important such as a rare or seldom photographed species. However I am beyond trying to get keepers with subject matter I have already got hundreds of images of, garden birds for example . I much prefer to quickly decide if the shot has anything to offer and if not delete it using the time saved to process worthwhile images. Having been snapping for over 40 years I feel confident in quick assessments using the rear screen and if spending a day in a hide you can usually find some time to assess what you have.

 

[aolander]

It may not be the best idea to delete images on your card. Best to delete them after they're on your computer and format your card in camera to delete images.

 

[RickW]

“...However I am beyond trying to get keepers with subject matter I have already got hundreds of images of, garden birds for example . I much prefer to quickly decide if the shot has anything to offer and if not delete it using the time saved to process worthwhile images.”

I am not trying to change how you work - whatever works for you is up to you. I was simply trying to point out that no matter how many years you’ve been shooting (by the way for the first 25 or so yrs of your 40 yrs experience, you were shooting on film and you had no instantaneous edits available for you to gain “experience” from), culling a couple of hours of images by relying on what a tiny physical jpeg looks like makes no sense to me or, I daresay, most. I wasn’t suggesting that you process all of the shots you take, but rather suggesting that viewing your session’s work at your editing device is as simple as quickly scrolling through the jpegs and deleting all obvious “trash”. Then, go through again, identify the for sure keepers and the possibles.

I’m also surprised (confused) about your not keeping potential great images just because you had some keepers of that subject earlier. I literally have thousands of archived photos of northern cardinals, bald eagles, every type of egret and heron, etc. but no two look the same due to lighting, composition, activity, etc. If you nailed a shot of a (fill in the subject’) tomorrow,would you delete it just because you already have nice shots of that subject from yesterday?

I do agree that if cranked out 25 sequential mages in 3 seconds of the same bird in the same composition, I would ultimately choose the best of the sequence and trash the rest, but I would never choose one of a rapid sequence of shots by relying on a poor in camera screen. Why risk losing a moneymaking keeper?

I guess one of the good things about photography is that there is seldom only one way to work, so whatever floats our boats is “right”.

 

[Rassie]

I believe I can review and evaluate an image inside my Z6II's EVF just as effectively as on a computer monitor. The images when viewed inside the EFV are clearer and have better contrast and dynamic range compared to viewing the same images on the back LCD where external light plays a role to degrade what one sees..

 

[Bardot]

“...However I am beyond trying to get keepers with subject matter I have already got hundreds of images of, garden birds for example . I much prefer to quickly decide if the shot has anything to offer and if not delete it using the time saved to process worthwhile images.”

I am not trying to change how you work - whatever works for you is up to you. I was simply trying to point out that no matter how many years you’ve been shooting (by the way for the first 25 or so yrs of your 40 yrs experience, you were shooting on film and you had no instantaneous edits available for you to gain “experience” from), culling a couple of hours of images by relying on what a tiny physical jpeg looks like makes no sense to me or, I daresay, most. I wasn’t suggesting that you process all of the shots you take, but rather suggesting that viewing your session’s work at your editing device is as simple as quickly scrolling through the jpegs and deleting all obvious “trash”. Then, go through again, identify the for sure keepers and the possibles.

I’m also surprised (confused) about your not keeping potential great images just because you had some keepers of that subject earlier. I literally have thousands of archived photos of northern cardinals, bald eagles, every type of egret and heron, etc. but no two look the same due to lighting, composition, activity, etc. If you nailed a shot of a (fill in the subject’) tomorrow,would you delete it just because you already have nice shots of that subject from yesterday?

I do agree that if cranked out 25 sequential mages in 3 seconds of the same bird in the same composition, I would ultimately choose the best of the sequence and trash the rest, but I would never choose one of a rapid sequence of shots by relying on a poor in camera screen. Why risk losing a moneymaking keeper?

I guess one of the good things about photography is that there is seldom only one way to work, so whatever floats our boats is “right”.

'
Hi Rick, Could not resist replying to your comments. First your comment of '25 years regarding shooting film giving no experience of instantaneous edits' suggests to me you have not spent a lot of time in a darkroom. The exact opposite is true, allow me to explain . I ran my own darkroom for 10 years. I processed and produced B&W prints, colour prints and slides. On a shoot I would take two bodies one loaded with Black and white Film one with colour. I loaded my own spools from bulk but lets say I would produce 36 shot of each. Having taken the time to develop the film you would have say 72 negatives. You can assess these on a light box using a magnifier but that's a dark art in itself. The next stage is producing contact stripes. (I have added a snap showing one of the many, many ring binders full of these that clutter my attic). This is the time to assess if you have any shots worthy of the time and effort needed to produce a keeper print. You are assessing a 35mm square mini photo, which is a lot lot harder than using a high resolution screen on the back of a camera, which with the touch of your finger gives a 100% magnification. Believe me you do not wish to produce prints from every negative the process takes an age! First strip printing a full size image to determine the basic exposure for the enlarger. Also if working in colour determining the correct settings for your colour filters. Then you produce your photo having to burn in and dodge out by hand (God how I prefer sliders on a PC ) . Don't forget each stage requires using three baths of developer, fixer and wash followed by drying time. Producing one photo may well take over an hour so you can see why you learn to be choosey with what you want to spend your time on. You may be aware of all this in which case I apologise but others may be interested to read it.
Second, I think you may be confused or misunderstand my comments about what I want to keep. I never want to throw away any shot that I have 'nailed' regardless of what I may already have cluttering up multiple external hard drives. That was the reason for the original post. I want to look at my shots think that one looks interesting or has potential and protect the image by quickly pressing a button ! What I don't want to protect are shots that when I look at them I can see have no merit. ( and sadly that is a lot of them) if I have missed the focus point then its not a keeper, if part of the subject is out of the image its not a keeper, if the bird for example has turned its head away its not a keeper ( although I did post a shot in the critique section a short while ago of a Buzzard looking down to see what people thought - take a look ) If I have buggered up the exposure its not a keeper ( yes you can save a lot in post but if highlights are truly burnt out they are burn out ) You shoot egrets so you must have taken shots where despite everything else being spot on you can't pull back detail in over exposed plumage. Learning to use the mirrorless system is also causing me to balls up shots. The delay between what you are looking at and the image that gets recorded is a pain. For example the small birds I have been practicing on during lock down turn their heads so fast I miss loads. You see it turn to the angle you want, squeeze the shutter look at the image and its looking the other way. If you shoot with a mirrorless system do you find the same thing?
Anyway as you rightly say each to their own. Stay safe ! Oh and here is a snap of those dreaded contact strips I learnt my trade on.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Harry.G]

@Bardot - something you may also have overlooked is , deleting images ""In Camera"" is Definitely not a good idea ! ! ...I`ve Been told this many many times on other forums and especially here , when I questioned the reasoning for not deleting in camera the simple answer that came back constantly was ""it will and DOES eventually corrupt your card"" given that most cards can be expensive enough I stopped doing it .. I must admit I did have a real bad habit of chimping and deleting all the time..

Now I know I`m not on you level of experience, however when most if not every person was telling me not to delete "in camera" because it was a bad idea, whether I was doing it in the field or at home I guess that`s when I kind of knew it must be "a bad idea" ..

Now I simply shoot whatever/whenever and check all the images at home, its also not the first time I`ve hit the "lock Image" key on a photo that I thought looked great in camera only to discover later at home that the photo wasn`t that great after all and that in fact the next few photos after the locked image were actually much better than I`d previously thought - lesson learned for me

just my 2.c worth


Harry.G

 

[RickW]

'
Hi Rick, Could not resist replying to your comments. First your comment of '25 years regarding shooting film giving no experience of instantaneous edits' suggests to me you have not spent a lot of time in a darkroom. The exact opposite is true, allow me to explain . I ran my own darkroom for 10 years. I processed and produced B&W prints, colour prints and slides. On a shoot I would take two bodies one loaded with Black and white Film one with colour. I loaded my own spools from bulk but lets say I would produce 36 shot of each. Having taken the time to develop the film you would have say 72 negatives. You can assess these on a light box using a magnifier but that's a dark art in itself. The next stage is producing contact stripes. (I have added a snap showing one of the many, many ring binders full of these that clutter my attic). This is the time to assess if you have any shots worthy of the time and effort needed to produce a keeper print. You are assessing a 35mm square mini photo, which is a lot lot harder than using a high resolution screen on the back of a camera, which with the touch of your finger gives a 100% magnification. Believe me you do not wish to produce prints from every negative the process takes an age! First strip printing a full size image to determine the basic exposure for the enlarger. Also if working in colour determining the correct settings for your colour filters. Then you produce your photo having to burn in and dodge out by hand (God how I prefer sliders on a PC ) . Don't forget each stage requires using three baths of developer, fixer and wash followed by drying time. Producing one photo may well take over an hour so you can see why you learn to be choosey with what you want to spend your time on. You may be aware of all this in which case I apologise but others may be interested to read it.
Second, I think you may be confused or misunderstand my comments about what I want to keep. I never want to throw away any shot that I have 'nailed' regardless of what I may already have cluttering up multiple external hard drives. That was the reason for the original post. I want to look at my shots think that one looks interesting or has potential and protect the image by quickly pressing a button ! What I don't want to protect are shots that when I look at them I can see have no merit. ( and sadly that is a lot of them) if I have missed the focus point then its not a keeper, if part of the subject is out of the image its not a keeper, if the bird for example has turned its head away its not a keeper ( although I did post a shot in the critique section a short while ago of a Buzzard looking down to see what people thought - take a look ) If I have buggered up the exposure its not a keeper ( yes you can save a lot in post but if highlights are truly burnt out they are burn out ) You shoot egrets so you must have taken shots where despite everything else being spot on you can't pull back detail in over exposed plumage. Learning to use the mirrorless system is also causing me to balls up shots. The delay between what you are looking at and the image that gets recorded is a pain. For example the small birds I have been practicing on during lock down turn their heads so fast I miss loads. You see it turn to the angle you want, squeeze the shutter look at the image and its looking the other way. If you shoot with a mirrorless system do you find the same thing?
Anyway as you rightly say each to their own. Stay safe ! Oh and here is a snap of those dreaded contact strips I learnt my trade on.
View attachment 14651

Not to turn this into an argument, my point about your years of experience has nothing at all to do with your considerable darkroom experience. It pertained to evaluating digital images. (Incidentally, I began in a darkroom 52 yrs ago). When you shot film, you developed your film and then reviewed your negatives using a high quality loupe or louped your contact sheets. You were looking at what would be raw images in digital speak. You got a very detailed look at the image and your years of darkroom experience allowed you to assess the print potential of each shot. Then you dodged and burned your blocked up or blown out areas and performed your other darkroom tricks using your considerable skill.

That is not the same as looking at a relatively low rez jpeg interpretation that a camera algorithm decided was best to evaluate the quality of an image. In fact I would argue that you are making my case for me; looking at a negative through a Rodenstock or Schneider loupe or viewing a contact sheet is considerably better that looking at a low rez guess made by your camera.

Let’s agree to disagree. We are each apparently satisfied with our workflow.

addendum - you can easily see totally out of focus mistakes or inadvertent shutter activations that are 100% trash by chimping, but I never bother to spend the time during a photo session. If you are chimping, you can’t have your eyes on potential action, even if sitting in a blind on a slow action day. Looking at the monitor by definition means you are notlooking at the field. I prefer to concentrate on the photo op and cull back in the office. The only time I ever chimp is to make sure my histogram looks good. I don’t care about the image on the screen - only the histogram.

 

[Bardot]

Feel I should add one last comment as their are so many kind soles fearing I may lose images I would live to regret. First protecting images so I can delete the rest is not something I would employ if the subject matter was of higher importance to me. In those cases I sort on my monitor like most others. Secondly I set my cameras to record RAW on the Express card with Backup jpeg on the SD card so if the worst were to happen I would at least have jpeg images. I always format my cards in camera before a shoot in an effort to keep them sweet. I asked the question as I am using the Z6 II a lot in an effort to find how to get the best from it so I am shooting loads and loads of images that there is a very low chance I will want to keep. Its circumstances like that where I am happy to triage on camera as it were.

 

[Rassie]

Not to turn this into an argument, my point about your years of experience has nothing at all to do with your considerable darkroom experience. It pertained to evaluating digital images. (Incidentally, I began in a darkroom 52 yrs ago). When you shot film, you developed your film and then reviewed your negatives using a high quality loupe or louped your contact sheets. You were looking at what would be raw images in digital speak. You got a very detailed look at the image and your years of darkroom experience allowed you to assess the print potential of each shot. Then you dodged and burned your blocked up or blown out areas and performed your other darkroom tricks using your considerable skill.

That is not the same as looking at a relatively low rez jpeg interpretation that a camera algorithm decided was best to evaluate the quality of an image. In fact I would argue that you are making my case for me; looking at a negative through a Rodenstock or Schneider loupe or viewing a contact sheet is considerably better that looking at a low rez guess made by your camera.

Let’s agree to disagree. We are each apparently satisfied with our workflow.

addendum - you can easily see totally out of focus mistakes or inadvertent shutter activations that are 100% trash by chimping, but I never bother to spend the time during a photo session. If you are chimping, you can’t have your eyes on potential action, even if sitting in a blind on a slow action day. Looking at the monitor by definition means you are notlooking at the field. I prefer to concentrate on the photo op and cull back in the office. The only time I ever chimp is to make sure my histogram looks good. I don’t care about the image on the screen - only the histogram.

For me there is one exception: When I travel for a week or longer on a vacation, for example a safari, at the end of each day I tend to delete the bad or unwanted images in the camera and back up the remainder to a backup drive. Then I format the memory card in camera and I'm ready for the next day's shoot. You're correct - I don't try and delete poor images in the thick of a photo shoot - the chances of missing that one amazing shot are too great. At the same time I don't want to return home with hundreds or even thousands more images on a backup drive that I then have to spend extra time on to delete. Granted the Jpeg that I review in camera is not the same quality of a Raw file, but I'm kind of stuck with a much slower tablet that I use to transfer the images from the memory card to the external drive, and I'm not putting Jpeg images on the external drive - I shoot Raw only. Those Raw files are much slower to open on the tablet for review and deletion.