| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/30/2002 12:17:13 AM · #1 |
Some people have very witty titles and it seems to be an important part of the image for the challenge. Just curious, do we HAVE to have a title? Sometimes, an image just speaks for itself.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:21:47 AM · #2 |
You can always call it "Untitled", which some people find pretentious but it leaves the photo in a kind of undefined state that can sometimes create a more powerful impact.
Personally, I don't enjoy "witty" titles very much. Your sense of humour is a very individual thing, and if somoeone looking at your photo doesn't "get" it, or thinks your joke is lame, it will prejudice them against your photo. My least favourite titles are the ones people often give to baby photos, where the humour is supposed to come from how cute the baby is. I don't know what's wrong with me, but they really irritate me! |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:27:58 AM · #3 |
| I think an image should be able to stand without a title. To me the only reason for one it to have something to call it besides 254783.jpg. And besides I am not really good with coming up with whitty titles anyways. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:29:43 AM · #4 |
I agree with Corey about the photo standing alone without a title, but I have never heard a complaint about titles unless the viewer thinks the title is trying to save the photo...
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:38:42 AM · #5 |
Perhaps unfortunately, I'm one of those who loves to make up (sometimes) witty titles. But, I always try to make it relevant to the image, not just a joke for its own sake. Maybe it's because I have more experience writing than photographing. But I realize some people would rather just see the image. Maybe take the titles off the thumbnail page, and if they're below the image on the voting page, you don't have to read it until you've studied the image.
I think not displaying titles would require quite a different approach to fulfilling an assigned topic, and is likely to penalize less-experienced photographers. Personally, I want to keep them... |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:39:45 AM · #6 |
| I have had comments saying that the title distracts from the photo. I actually thought about just leaving themo off all together. I just feel bad doing that kinda like I have left something uncomplete. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:43:21 AM · #7 |
Would the Mona Lisa have the same impact if da Vinci had called it 123456.jpg?
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/30/2002 12:42:52 AM. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:43:53 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Corey:
...And besides I am not really good with coming up with whitty titles anyways.
And yet your current (WINNING) entry has a witty and appropriate title...as Phil Ochs said: now the President and the CIA are saying "Thank God for coincidence!"
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/30/2002 1:13:54 AM. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:47:11 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
Would the Mona Lisa have the same impact if da Vinci had called it 123456.jpg
We'll never know, since Leonardo himself titled it La Gioconda. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 12:48:04 AM · #10 |
I think that titles can distract from the image if they are longer than just 2 or 3 words. The title should fit the photo, not the other way around.
It is possible to create a title that your photo can't support :)
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 01:12:54 AM · #11 |
My three highest-scoring photos have titles of 4,1, and 5 words long. I don't think it's possible to make a general "rule" about this.
A couple of times my comment to someone included an alternate title suggestion. I think someone pointed out in an earlier version of this thread that it is extremely rare to see a photo displayed (gallery, newspaper, magazine, TV, etc.) without AT LEAST the title, if not a lot more information (discreetly) accompanying it.
I think saying the image should stand on its own is to ask us to all look at images in an abnormal way (from what we're used to). I think that is a valuable educational exercise, but might be stressful and frustrating to a lot of folks in the context of this "contest" format. I really do think it would push the scores out of the middle and towards the ends of the scale, as voters rely entirely on the image to judge how well the challenge is met.
My suggestion would be to try one challenge where titles are suppressed until after the voting period. I think letting people know 2-3 weeks ahead that the challenge will be in an "image-only" format, but not announcing the actual topic until the usual time, would be reasonable. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 01:17:47 AM · #12 |
I think this would be great, let people think what may about an image and see where it goes. How about it Drew and Langdon an NO TITLES ALLOWED challenge?
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/30/2002 1:17:27 AM. |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 01:27:49 AM · #13 |
Personally, I think titles are an integral part of the picture and can give an insight into what the photographer was thinking about the image -- or even, heaven forbid, push viewers into seeing it in a different way than they might otherwise do (save a photo, maybe?). But then I''m a writer like GeneralE, so maybe words carry a little additional impact with me.
That said, I was also joking with someone earlier about the number of entries that use the challenge topic as part of the title for their entry. It''s almost as if they don''t trust the viewers to see that aspect and thus they feel they have to reinforce it. (Don''t get me wrong, I''m generalizing -- not every photo that uses the challenge topic as part of the title fits the stereotype I''ve created.)
I''ve used titles a number of different ways -- as an advertising tag (Weinhardt), as a literal description of the photo content (Grevy), and as a very subtle clue about what I see in the picture (Pyxis) among others. Perhaps some see them as witty -- I like to think they''re appropriate.
Whatever the case, I''ve been in enough art galleries to know that images are rarely untitled. You usually see as least a title, the medium the artwork was created in, and the artist''s name. When voting, we already know the medium (unless someone has cheated) and knowing the name removes the anonymity factor. The title, however, is as much a part of the image (in my mind) as is the pixel 2 columns over and 30 rows down.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/30/2002 1:28:49 AM.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 02:02:42 AM · #14 |
I agree with patella... I enjoy titleing my photos... I think that's part of the fun :)
I just don't care for some titles that are a paragraph long that explain why the photo is what it is :)
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 02:14:33 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I agree with patella... I enjoy titleing my photos... I think that's part of the fun :)
I just don't care for some titles that are a paragraph long that explain why the photo is what it is :)
Ceci n'est pas un photo!
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 02:19:14 AM · #16 |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 02:30:27 AM · #17 |
|
|
06/30/2002 02:33:00 AM · #18 |
does that say please pass the pipe? :)
|
|
|
|
06/30/2002 02:41:41 AM · #19 |
The translation is "This is not a pipe".
"The famous pipe. How people reproached me for it! And yet, could you stuff my pipe? No, its just a representation, is it not? So if I had written on my picture 'This is a pipe', I'd have been lying!"
- René Magritte
Titles can be very interesting things :). |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 03:29:25 AM · #20 |
that's pretty cool, lisae...
I usually love making up titles for my pictures, but I sure wish to high heaven that I hadn't this week! I waited until the last minute to submit, then just went with the first (literal) words that came to mind--bad, bad call! |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 04:19:29 AM · #21 |
| I would think a title would really depend on the photograph itself. Example, for the sake of conversation, it'd be easier to refer to a title than someone's description of an Untitled work. It's a good sugguestion to move the title to the bottom of the photos but I do think titles are necessary. -Nicole |
|
|
|
06/30/2002 10:08:48 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by amitchell:
that's pretty cool, lisae...
I usually love making up titles for my pictures, but I sure wish to high heaven that I hadn't this week! I waited until the last minute to submit, then just went with the first (literal) words that came to mind--bad, bad call!
One of the recent site improvements is that you can edit the information fields (title, description, settings, etc.) without having to unsubmit and re-submit the photo. You still have a few hours to change the title before anyone else sees it. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 07:42:27 PM  |
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: 04/19/2024 07:42:27 PM EDT.
|
