How often do you take the title of the image

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

08/22/2007 11:15:38 AM · #1

into account when viewing it or voting?

I personally feel that an image should be able to hold up without a title, and usually will try to view an image first before reading what the title is.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

08/22/2007 11:16:55 AM · #2

To me, if the photographer puts a title to the shot, then I consider it as it is part of the total presentation of their work. Long, nonsensical or titles that attempt to explain the shot as well as spelling errors in titles do impact how I view the shot. The photographer is trying too hard to get me to have the impression they want and not the one I actually have. And with spelling errors...well, it you don't care enough about your shot to spell the title correctly, I don't care how i vote on it either. I also dislike titles that, to me, are just annoying...for example 'tHis IS mY pH0t0gRaph.'

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 11:20:27.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

08/22/2007 11:17:37 AM · #3

you have no choice, you can't leave it blank

Originally posted by CEJ:

To me, if the photographer puts a title to the shot, then I consider it as it is part of the total presentation of their work.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

08/22/2007 11:18:31 AM · #4

90% of the time i ignore the title completely

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

08/22/2007 11:21:14 AM · #5

Originally posted by ajdelaware:

I personally feel that an image should be able to hold up without a title, and usually will try to view an image first before reading what the title is.

That's too general a statement to make. It doesn't always work that way.

Sometimes title and image make for a beautiful partnership.

JPR's image Overextended Intercourse, is a cool example where not only image is great but where the title adds a completely different twist and dimension to the shot. It also gives you an insight to the photographers eye or mind (which is pretty scary btw. lolol).

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 12:20:12.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

08/22/2007 11:22:17 AM · #6

Originally posted by hopper:

you have no choice, you can't leave it blank

Untitled, ..., _, -, I view much less harshly than the others mentioned.

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM

08/22/2007 11:23:56 AM · #7

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by ajdelaware:
I personally feel that an image should be able to hold up without a title, and usually will try to view an image first before reading what the title is.

That's too general a statement to make. It doesn't always work that way.

Sometimes title and image make for a beautiful partnership.

I agree, but you also have to think that the image isn't always going to be viewed with the title attached, so the image needs to be able to stand on its own.

I know titles often provide clarification, but I dont think they should be responsible for total explanation.

gg3rd

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

08/22/2007 11:28:44 AM · #8

A good matching title on a good image is like the icing on the cake. In other words, I do consider the title when voting. A bad title can take away from the image, imo. Also, it bothers me when I see an "untitled" image. If the photographer didn't bother to name it, what kind of consideration is expected from those looking at and voting on it?

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

08/22/2007 11:33:07 AM · #9

Originally posted by ajdelaware:

I know titles often provide clarification, but I dont think they should be responsible for total explanation.

Titles can do much more than just clarify. I understand what you are saying I just don't believe it's a theory or position worth sticking to, wholesale. Let each image breathe on it's own, with or without a title. Keep in mind, that sometimes the title makes the image and that should be cool, as well.

Don't box them in or out.

Here's another fine example where the title kicks booty and flips the image on it's ear. Pretty damn clever, if you ask me.

( the title based on this famous painting )

There are millions of great examples as well as ones where the titles ruin the image, of course. The pen can be mightier than the sword...or photograph in this case. An equal and opposite danger.

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 11:41:39.

pcody

Canon PowerShot G6

08/22/2007 11:40:16 AM · #10

I love a good match between the title and the picture. It just gives it so much more to think about. When I was voting, I'd give extra points for an apt title. I didn't subtract points unless the title was annoying. I didn't subtract for misspellings. I'm not smart enough to know if it was an accident or if the photographer is a non-english speaking person doing their best to translate the words they want to use. I would sometimes comment on the error though.

tate

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

08/22/2007 11:40:54 AM · #11

I have seen images that were damaged by the title - IMO - and that is usually my goal in naming an image "c'mon Tate, don't make this any worse than it already is ;P"
I'll try to find an example in the meantime ...

Originally posted by gg3rd:

A good matching title on a good image is like the icing on the cake. In other words, I do consider the title when voting. A bad title can take away from the image, imo.

tate

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

08/22/2007 11:44:36 AM · #12

Here's an exercise - look at this image without looking at the title:

What does it look like?

Then look at the title. Did I make a bad assumption titling it? - not allowing the viewer's perception to add other possible emotive qualities to the subject?

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

08/22/2007 11:45:23 AM · #13

I think a title forces you to view the image a certain way too, which I guess is good and bad. The image you posted "the scream", the moment I saw it, (pre-title viewing) I instantly saw a skull, or a look of horror, so in this case the title worked for me because the skullish image does stick out rather prominently in the image.

The main image that prompted me to make this thread is currently a challenge entry and would serve as my best example, but that will have to wait.

silverscreen

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

08/22/2007 11:45:30 AM · #14

Originally posted by CEJ:

And with spelling errors...well, it you don't care enough about your shot to spell the title correctly, I don't care how i vote on it either.

That seems a little harsh if you ask me...

Did you ever consider the fact that not all users here have English as their native language - and some might even be dyslectic...

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

08/22/2007 11:47:58 AM · #15

Titles are dangerous. Or at least tricky. They can have a major impact on the score IMO. I say that from a recipient standpoint. Sometimes that's the hardest part of submitting to a challenge. You may have a great image but send the wrong message with the title, and you can screw it up. On the other hand, a clever title can lift up a mediocre image - like it or not.

As a voter I think titles factor my vote subliminally if they are a match to the image and challenge theme. The titles that can alter the vote are the ones that are too dang descriptive or explanatory, and titles that are the only thing making a connection to the challenge theme (IMO of course); i.e. "shoehorning".

"Untitled"...what's up with that?! Come on, make a decision and put a title on your entry. For me, that can only hurt your score, not help it.

edit - typo.

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 12:07:25.

08/22/2007 11:50:50 AM · #16

BTW...are we talking about photography or DPC and voting?

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/22/2007 11:51:58 AM · #17

Originally posted by metatate:

Here's an exercise - look at this image without looking at the title:

What does it look like?

Then look at the title. Did I make a bad assumption titling it? - not allowing the viewer's perception to add other possible emotive qualities to the subject?

This is kind of what im saying, this image alone without a title to me just is 2 bananas, but when you add the title, it forces an emotion to be associated. So you took a still life image and made it into an emotive portrait via the title. Dont take this the wrong way, a subpar image (just an opinion, no worries) was made acceptable by the title. I dont like that hahaha.

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

08/22/2007 11:52:44 AM · #18

I consider the title an important part of the image. It doesn't "make" the image, for a good picture has to be a good picture visually. However, the title is an important link between the viewer and the photographer. The title can impart a subtle or overt communication about intent or mood. It can help to explain or set the tone for the visual.

Having said that, on DPC, you occasionally see an image that has no apparent relationship to the challenge other than a title. In my experience, this doesn't work, and usually works against the image in voting.

I always think very hard about what to call an image. Two of my proudest "title" achievements are:

and

The title is important.

08/22/2007 11:56:38 AM · #19

Originally posted by glad2badad:

"Untitled"...what's up with that?! Come on, make a decision and put a title on your entry.

"UNTITLED" can be a conscious decision as opposed to an indecision. If I wanted truly genuine reactions to an image, I wouldn't give it a title. The second you title it you force the story of it and you change the perception of how its viewed. Therefore, no title gives you a cleaner critique, in my opinion.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

08/22/2007 11:59:27 AM · #20

The violin shot is a more functional title for me, because it simply sums up the image, its not like I was questioning how to view the image before hand, it was clear to me from the second I saw it - a big one and a small one.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

08/22/2007 12:05:45 PM · #21

Originally posted by ajdelaware:

Originally posted by glad2badad:
"Untitled"...what's up with that?! Come on, make a decision and put a title on your entry.

"UNTITLED" can be a conscious decision as opposed to an indecision. If I wanted truly genuine reactions to an image, I wouldn't give it a title. The second you title it you force the story of it and you change the perception of how its viewed. Therefore, no title gives you a cleaner critique, in my opinion.

The problem is "Untitled" IS a title. I find it distracting. I can understand situations where a photographer may not want to title an image. In that case I would put a . (period) or something unobtrusive. DPC should really give an option to not have a title at all IMO for those that care not to have one.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

08/22/2007 12:06:04 PM · #22

Let's stop titling books, movies, songs...

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

08/22/2007 12:11:20 PM · #23

Originally posted by doctornick:

Let's stop titling books, movies, songs...

You act like there hasn't been untitled works in other mediums before.

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

08/22/2007 12:12:44 PM · #24

Originally posted by ajdelaware:

Originally posted by doctornick:
Let's stop titling books, movies, songs...

You act like there hasn't been untitled works in other mediums before.

Did I say that?