Sparrow
Veteran
.... well then I think we need a 'Dyslexia Forman' replete with it's own Meteor
Thoughts on titling images.
- Thread starter Black
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 30
- Views 5K
Vince Lupo
Whatever
I've been going through the same issue, as I have an exhibit currently on view at an area creative arts center here in Maryland. Some of my pieces are titled, but some are just 'Untitled #__'. If I title comes to me, then I'll use it, if it doesn't it doesn't. Sometimes someone will suggest a title to me, and if it strikes me as being the right one, then I might change an 'Untitled' to that title. I'm completely flexible!
The one thing that I do have against titles is that I don't want to unnecessarily 'steer' someone into seeing a photo in a particular way -- I'd like people to create their own narrative, which may be entirely different from my intention, or from what was actually happening at the time I took the photo.
For example, I currently have this photo in the exhibition, and it's 'Untitled':
Untitled by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr
Now, a friend of mine suggested that I change the title of this photo to 'Salem', and I actually like that title. But, if I did that, then it would put you in mind of 'witches' or something occultish. However, if I called this photo 'Midnight Meeting -- Jackson, Mississippi', it might put you in mind of something completely different. Of course, the reality of what was actually happening at the time I took the photo was far removed from both of those premises, so that's why I have it 'Untitled'. Let the viewer make up their own story.
The one pet peeve I have is to incorporate the name of the place in which the photo was taken in order to (in my view, anyways) 'heighten' the significance of the photo, when in fact the photo is kinda boring either way. Like 'Chairs, Paris' or something like that. If it was just 'Chairs', it might be just an uninteresting photo of some chairs. But add the word 'Paris' in there, and all of a sudden there's this connotation of romance and all the mythical air that's associated with the city of Paris (admittedly I am coming at it from a North American perspective), and now the chairs take on more significance, when in fact it's still an uninteresting photo of some chairs (and in reality those chairs may have just been sitting on your front porch, and nowhere near Paris, France). Having said that, people at the reception for my exhibit were wanting to know where a number of the photos were taken. I generally obliged and told them, but for me it was affecting the way people 'read' my photos. Whether it was good or bad, helped or hindered, well that's not for me to say. Personally I prefer that people not know, as I don't think it's important to my particular work. Then again, I'm not the viewer, so I could be wrong!
So I'm still wrestling with the issue myself. I think that if a title comes to you, great. If not, 'Untitled' #__' is fine too. And if a photo starts off as 'Untitled #__' and then a title comes to you later, so be it. All depends on how much you want to influence people's interpretation of the photo.
The one thing that I do have against titles is that I don't want to unnecessarily 'steer' someone into seeing a photo in a particular way -- I'd like people to create their own narrative, which may be entirely different from my intention, or from what was actually happening at the time I took the photo.
For example, I currently have this photo in the exhibition, and it's 'Untitled':
Untitled by Vince.Lupo, on Flickr
Now, a friend of mine suggested that I change the title of this photo to 'Salem', and I actually like that title. But, if I did that, then it would put you in mind of 'witches' or something occultish. However, if I called this photo 'Midnight Meeting -- Jackson, Mississippi', it might put you in mind of something completely different. Of course, the reality of what was actually happening at the time I took the photo was far removed from both of those premises, so that's why I have it 'Untitled'. Let the viewer make up their own story.
The one pet peeve I have is to incorporate the name of the place in which the photo was taken in order to (in my view, anyways) 'heighten' the significance of the photo, when in fact the photo is kinda boring either way. Like 'Chairs, Paris' or something like that. If it was just 'Chairs', it might be just an uninteresting photo of some chairs. But add the word 'Paris' in there, and all of a sudden there's this connotation of romance and all the mythical air that's associated with the city of Paris (admittedly I am coming at it from a North American perspective), and now the chairs take on more significance, when in fact it's still an uninteresting photo of some chairs (and in reality those chairs may have just been sitting on your front porch, and nowhere near Paris, France). Having said that, people at the reception for my exhibit were wanting to know where a number of the photos were taken. I generally obliged and told them, but for me it was affecting the way people 'read' my photos. Whether it was good or bad, helped or hindered, well that's not for me to say. Personally I prefer that people not know, as I don't think it's important to my particular work. Then again, I'm not the viewer, so I could be wrong!
So I'm still wrestling with the issue myself. I think that if a title comes to you, great. If not, 'Untitled' #__' is fine too. And if a photo starts off as 'Untitled #__' and then a title comes to you later, so be it. All depends on how much you want to influence people's interpretation of the photo.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Yep ...same for me 😱
As to titles ...I think they are at best unnecessary and at worst a distraction.
I know that I`ve asked you in the past ,Chris, about some of your early and very imaginative titles.
That was because I found myself concentrating on them rather than the image.
As you point out in the " legs bending backwards" title ...they can be so personal as to be lost on any viewer.
It will not surprise you that I`ve never watched Twin Peaks 😱
Out to Lunch
Veteran
Same here: "TILTING images". It deserves a post. This said, I don't title a photo of a bicycle "bicycle". But I do mention the place/country where the photo was taken, with which camera and lens, and when.
oneANT
Established
Is there a ruling to be made?
Could someone please email me the outcome, ...would hate to break any rules.
Could someone please email me the outcome, ...would hate to break any rules.
Black
Photographer.
No rules. Just opinion.
burancap
Veteran
LOL, I tilted too!
If I make the effort, I try to use something descriptive in a sorting sense. Specifically, camera relative and a trailing number. I have used proper titles, but typically only when it arrives like a lightning bolt and adds something to the story.
If I make the effort, I try to use something descriptive in a sorting sense. Specifically, camera relative and a trailing number. I have used proper titles, but typically only when it arrives like a lightning bolt and adds something to the story.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
I title my pictures with a descriptive title for reference within my catalogue system as I'm too disorganized to come up with any workable reference system.
As for titling when showing....hhhmm, I'd happily call all my images 'untitled' simply because I'm happy for the viewer to decide on an image without the sway, intended or not, that a title brings. Trouble is 'untitled' just has such a 'worthy' cache...
As for titling when showing....hhhmm, I'd happily call all my images 'untitled' simply because I'm happy for the viewer to decide on an image without the sway, intended or not, that a title brings. Trouble is 'untitled' just has such a 'worthy' cache...
fotographz
Established
Titling a photograph for me can be a connection of sorts between that image and the title.
Some photographs just don't need title...but a great photograph will stir an emotion in me
to make my own story regardless of "title".
(....but I title most so I can find them AND clients who buy can tell you which they are interested in)
Some photographs just don't need title...but a great photograph will stir an emotion in me
to make my own story regardless of "title".
(....but I title most so I can find them AND clients who buy can tell you which they are interested in)
peterm1
Veteran
I dont give titles to images posted here except the title they have on my Flickr page. For some reason a couple of years ago I started doing this on Flickr. I think I got sick of seeing titles like "DSC_12345" on my images which is how Flickr otherwise names images. I look at an image I make and like and find that some name often comes to mind, even if it is something as prosaic and uninspiring as "Cafe Study 1" or something of this sort. Often though it will be something more poetic, I guess because that is how I am. And sometimes it is just descriptive. I dont think there is a need to go overboard but I now like to provide some name at least. It can add something.
fotographz
Established
...a response to "tilting" an image.
...a response to "tilting" an image.
tilt, jan 2000
...a response to "tilting" an image.
tilt, jan 2000
Similar threads
