DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Has playing around with titles become a hit?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 24 of 24, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/22/2004 10:00:07 AM · #1
I felt many photos were playing around with titles to suit the subject entry. It may be a nice photo but in reality, it does not suit the subject. If I feel that the photo is not suitable regardless how good it is, I will normally give a low rating. What say you.
 04/22/2004 10:29:31 AM · #2
I agree, but sometimes it's very hard to let the image speak for itself. A well chosen title can help to focus the people watching the photo. Serendipity is a nice example. Animalpictures (cat, dog, bird etc), children, even juwelry and money, may be very nice, I don't see the connection with the true meaning of serendipity. So I give a five. But what if I miss the point? A title or a few words to explain the meaning could help. Very difficult for all of us I suppose. Greetz Ted
 04/22/2004 10:40:03 AM · #3
If you're subtle, your title can help point out things in your image that 'speed' voters might miss. As long as you don't beat anyone over the head with your title.
 04/22/2004 10:57:09 AM · #4
The problem with on topic voting, may just mean that the voter does not get what the fotog was saying, ie. in the strength challenge the description said something like 'YOUR INTERPRETATION' of strength, so for people to comment 'doesn't meet challenge' is not very fair IMO. In other cases I think the topic can help to clear up a shot.
 04/22/2004 11:05:00 AM · #5
We've heard so many times that 'a picture speaks a thousand words'. I agree with that statement. Similarly, a picture should not rely heavily on an accompanying title. Surely a great image does not require any title; it speaks for itself.

Titling the image does not serve to change the image in any physical way.

Message edited by author 2004-04-22 11:06:32.
 04/22/2004 11:09:37 AM · #6
Originally posted by ellamay:
The problem with on topic voting, may just mean that the voter does not get what the fotog was saying,


If the voters doen't "get" the message of the photo, the photographer didn't do a good job. I'm from the camp that a picture should tell 1000 words; this being the case, if it's a well done photo (wich is not an easy task) you shouldn't have to add another 10 words to a title to tell the story.
 04/22/2004 12:05:10 PM · #7
Titling works of art is rather traditional and often important. How, for example, would you know that a portrait was a self-portrait without a title to tell you so? And how do you refer to a particular piece by an artist when it has no title?

When I visit a gallery or museum the first thing I look at is the image. If it interests me, the next thing I look at is its information--I wonder what the artist called this? --I wonder when and where it was made?

Yes, a work can stand on its own--but I don't think that, in every case, it should have to.

Something to consider:
"When we were talking about titles, I wanted to stress the great importance of titles. If, when Picasso painted "Guernica" he had called it "Cow's Head with Electric Light," the meaning would change completely." (From: Death Under a Blue Sky of Painting: An Interview with Noel Dolla, by Raphael Rubinstein. //www.cultureport.com/newhp/lingo/authors/dolla.html)
04/22/2004 12:10:44 PM · #8
Titles establish the context of the photo which is not always present in the image. Often, the context is vital to understanding the image.
 04/22/2004 12:12:40 PM · #9
I almost feel that I screwed up by not taking an image that "represents serendipity". It was an image were I personaly experienced serendipity. Without my title no one would know how I felt that this was serendipity, and even then it might not be clear. So mostly I blame myself for not representing serendipity. I am definatly one that relied on my title to help explain. Sorry if that doesn't seem right to some.
 04/22/2004 12:21:33 PM · #10
Me too, G4...I kind of felt that if it was pre-arranged serendipity then it wasn't serendipity at all. So much for that thought.
 04/22/2004 01:00:41 PM · #11
If a photo only fits due to the title it gets a low vote from me - I very often ignore them anyway.

If it's a good stand-alone shot it will probably get the accolade of being favorited later - which is one of the best compliments one can receive in my view.

KaDi - that's a fair thought process, but sometimes those who don't speak English as a first language can suffer typos or mispellings which may devalue their shot.

Message edited by author 2004-04-22 13:03:13.
 04/22/2004 01:14:53 PM · #12
Originally posted by Imagineer:


KaDi - that's a fair thought process, but sometimes those who don't speak English as a first language can suffer typos or mispellings which may devalue their shot.


True. And unfortunate that some voters can't see beyond the title (or its spelling). I, too, try not to view the title first or place un-due importance on it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with an appropriate title, difficult as they may be to come up with. And I certainly have no problem with the title being "untitled". If, for example, someone wants to post a self-portrait and not call it one, that's fine with me--just don't expect me to know that it's a self-portrait.

In some sense, all the challenge images already have a title, that of the challenge. I believe someone mentioned in another thread that he or she had a pet peeve of those who just title the photo with the challenge title. (There's one in Serendipity titled "Serendipity") I don't share the peeve, but it does re-inforce the idea that no matter what one calls their challenge photo it already has something of a name.
 04/22/2004 01:18:28 PM · #13
I agree - I still consider my titles but I always assume that some people will ignore them.
 04/22/2004 01:26:15 PM · #14
Originally posted by Imagineer:
I agree - I still consider my titles but I always assume that some people will ignore them.


In some cases they will. They may also ignore your depth of field, your use of color, your innovative cropping....

I see you entered the "Literalisms" challenge. (I haven't been around long enough for that one.) That challenge is a great example of one that most would have failed at without the ability to title their image.
 04/22/2004 01:50:03 PM · #15
I was looking at a "serendipitious" picture and couldn't find any in it.
Then I looked at the title and that explained it to me.
Am I stupid?
Am I blind?
Or was it just very subtle?
I don't know.
But the title helped me find it!!!!
 04/23/2004 05:33:55 AM · #16
I don't think the title helps at all - at least it didn't for me in the Wheels challenge. I entitled it Steam Engine Cog Wheels (can't be much clearer than that - or more unorginal for that metter :)) and I think it was pretty obvious that the photo was of cog wheels, however I still got a comment saying it didn't fit the challenge topic................
 04/23/2004 07:54:10 AM · #17
Titles can be fun. I look at the title and it does influence my vote. If it's clever or it gives me the photographers take on the picture, that is great. Sometimes they have to use words to help me see what they saw.
A recent example is "Denied Entry". Wasn't that wonderful? It wouldn't have the same impact if it was titled "untitled".
 04/23/2004 08:12:27 AM · #18
One can be too literal in saying that all titles are unnecessary. There are some challenges such as Literalisms, Magazine Covers and Book Titles that clearly need them. However, aside from these a title should either be an appropriate or witty hint at the subject, or simply something that means something to the photographer - but I still believe that given the challenge subject an image should be able to do the talking and if anything make the viewer work hard to find a link (provided winning is not your main objective!).

Blatant statements of the obvious in the title are annoying, as are those which try to lever the image into the challenge.
 04/23/2004 08:29:31 AM · #19
One of my worst pictures - technically - garnered a 5.482. It would have/should have done MUCH worse. I believe the title is what added points to my score.

"A Page from My Wife's Diary"
 04/30/2004 03:02:50 PM · #20
The serendipity challenge was my first time voting but I'm of the mindset that the title should not be doing the work of the photograph, or the photographer for that matter. A great photo shouldn't need a copy writer to make a clear statement. Since the topic of the challenges are a matter of general knowledge, if the photographer can't make the idea strong with the image alone then it is a weak image (in terms of meeting a specific challenge). A subtle title can assist the viewer but the theme should be fairly clear to most people without it. I came across some titles that were just begging me to see it the way the photographer wanted it to be seen. This can be compared to bad writing; a writer can argue that the audience is just missing the point, or is coming from a different place, or is just plain dull witted, but in the end, if he keeps having to defend himself against this 'misunderstanding' than it is clear he has not done a good job of making his statement. Have I made myself clear?
 04/30/2004 03:09:36 PM · #21
Very clear. You're 100% correct. If the title's more than about 4 or 5 words, the title's doing too much work.
 04/30/2004 03:29:41 PM · #22
Originally posted by melismatica:
The serendipity challenge was my first time voting but I'm of the mindset that the title should not be doing the work of the photograph, or the photographer for that matter. A great photo shouldn't need a copy writer to make a clear statement. Since the topic of the challenges are a matter of general knowledge, if the photographer can't make the idea strong with the image alone then it is a weak image (in terms of meeting a specific challenge). A subtle title can assist the viewer but the theme should be fairly clear to most people without it. I came across some titles that were just begging me to see it the way the photographer wanted it to be seen. This can be compared to bad writing; a writer can argue that the audience is just missing the point, or is coming from a different place, or is just plain dull witted, but in the end, if he keeps having to defend himself against this 'misunderstanding' than it is clear he has not done a good job of making his statement. Have I made myself clear?


Yes, I'm sure you have. Yet...

a good title can confirm the strength of an image. It can charge it poetically, provide a unique context, a stimulus or simply the proper name for a subject. If the image is part of an opus, a theme or a series, it can indicate this. The criterium for what is a poor or well-chosen title, IMO, should be whether or not we -via the whole presentation, image and title- are richer or poorer for it.

I imagine, a poet who takes photographs will, naturally, be better at choosing a title. A photographer who is also a poet will give us both worlds. A good photographer who does not have a breath for the poetry of language would do best to restrict his wording, both in length and diction.

04/30/2004 03:33:57 PM · #23
I've seen few, if any, cases here where any title has added any 'poetry' to the accompanying image. I have, however, seen a few people trying to add the odd essay or two. In any case, I agree that a simple, concise title can give depth to an image. Much beyond that is merely window dressing.
 04/30/2004 03:40:23 PM · #24
Originally posted by lockjawdavis:
I've seen few, if any, cases here where any title has added any 'poetry' to the accompanying image...


I have see a few. It doesn't, really, matter to me how often and how many can do magic. It's heaven though when it happens.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 08:15:27 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 08:15:27 PM EDT.