Changing the title of a photo

[winger]

I'm lousy at thinking of good titles for my photos, but I always have to have something to put down when I enter them into something. So what do I do if a photo gets into a show and then I later think of a better title? Does it matter if I change it for the next one? I'm not anywhere near well-known, so my guess is that no one else will ever notice. But is it ever an issue?

 

[DWThomas]

Hey, change it! Even if you were well known. Trouble would perhaps occur if you tried to enter the same photo into the next instance of the same show under a different title. At least, many organizations prohibit entering a work of art that was in a previous year's show. Of course, as one on the receiving side of some shows, I'm not convinced we are too reliable at catching that anyway!

I modified the titles on a couple of pieces several years ago to enter a group of them in a show that encouraged a "body of work." I wanted something in the title to tie them together because they were somewhat abstract details with the commonality perhaps not as obvious visually as it might have been. (Of course not much came out of it anyway! )

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I have always believed that only weak photos need titles. However there are exceptions. I have only given titles to two of the photos that I have entered. That was because I doubted that most people would have the background to see the connections that I saw.

You could be a bit devilish and give your photo a fanciful name like Eunice or Pepper #30. You could say that you are paying homage to Edward Weston. That might pique some curiosity in the viewers. You would also be making a statement against a silly rule. A friend of a friend of mine in college did something similar. Each semester you had to fill out a religious preference card. You had to put down something to be considered as having fully registered. Considering that it was none of the school's business and majoring in architecture he neatly entered "red brick."

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Do what Weston did, e.g. "Pepper No. 30"



Being an engineer, if I were ever to submit a photo (which is never), I'd create a title based on the date, maybe the frame number, and some other identifying info, e.g.

2016.04.28-ZI-04

 

[DWThomas]

Do what Weston did, e.g. "Pepper No. 30"



Being an engineer, if I were ever to submit a photo (which is never), I'd create a title based on the date, maybe the frame number, and some other identifying info, e.g.

2016.04.28-ZI-04

Oh nay! This is the chance to unleash your right brain! Like the recent one I put in the gallery here -- it shows a closeup of some wild mechanics of a Shay logging locomotive. These had a steam powered three cylinder vertical engine on one side (with the boiler off center to make room) and a Rube Goldberg driveshaft set up with sliding couplings and universal joints to permit the three connected trucks to turn going around curves. Every axle under the loco has a bevel gear on one end that mates with a corresponding bevel gear on the main driveshaft. So, I called it "All Wheel Drive" But alas, sometimes it's not that easy or obvious!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Oh nay! This is the chance to unleash your right brain! Like the recent one I put in the gallery here -- it shows a closeup of some wild mechanics of a Shay logging locomotive.
...

I love locomotives of all types and Shay locomotives in particular. I need to get over to your part of the country. Alas, I haven't seen your photo.

I'm working on being subscriber, and I should be, but I have no electronic linkages to my accounts. Might have to send a cheque.

 

[MattKing]

I usually enjoy choosing titles. They are rarely important to the photo, but sometimes they can be.

What is important is that they are also useful identifiers. When you are trying to communicate about a photo, it can be really frustrating if you have 17 different photos with all the same label - "untitled".

The only thing I would say about changing a title is that it can create confusion if the photo has become known under the old title - particularly if you know it under the earlier title.

If there is a "blurb" attached to a photo in a later show, it might be worth considering referencing the previous title in that.

 

[DWThomas]

I love locomotives of all types and Shay locomotives in particular. I need to get over to your part of the country. Alas, I haven't seen your photo.

I'm working on being subscriber, and I should be, but I have no electronic linkages to my accounts. Might have to send a cheque.

Well not to cut Sean out of a check, but at the moment I have several dozen shots from the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania up in my PBase galleries and haven't yet finished getting the color bit zapper stuff ready, so currently you can see it in pure analog ... The museum item is only a static display, the place to go (from my dubious mental database) is Cass, West Virginia. They have a herd of Shays pulling tourist trains! One of their runs goes to the top of the 3rd highest mountain in the state (4,842 feet), negotiating a couple of switchbacks and some 12% grade (mighty steep for a non-cog rail!) Edit: and from June 1965 with my Burke&James ...

(Apologies to Bethe for the thread hijack, but she should get down there too! -- and she lives closer to it!)

 

[winger]

Definitely no need to apologize - thanks for the leads! WV is close enough (though I want to get up to Steamtown, too) I have a train crazy 6 year old and I love them, too. I don't know if there's a photo of it, but evidently I was in a Shay when I was around 3 or 4 courtesy of a friend of my dad (I think it was somewhere in Maine?). The 765 locomotive went through here a few years ago and I got some shots with digital and one with my Crown Graphic (might be in my gallery here?).

And thank you all for the input. I sorta use titles as an identifier so I can keep them kinda straight if I've entered photos for exhibitions. Some even don't let you use "untitled" :eek:

 

[Bill Burk]

Sidewinder Drive Gear

That's what I titled my shot of a Shay gear at Roaring Camp in Felton... our pictures are different enough but still just a fragment of a fascinating machine.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Bethe, it's your photograph. No one else's. Title it whatever you like, whenever you like, as often as you like. If someone hassles you over the title upon entry to a venue, then that's a good indicator of a venue you may not wish to patronize any further, as they are obviously looking at all the wrong things in your pictures.



Ken

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I really try hard now to come up with a unique title that singularly identifies the image. For too long I just gave simple titles based on obvious subject matter, but have run into having many too many good prints entitled things like "rocks and fog" or "canyon wall" or "boulders," etc. I also find that if I can't really put my finger on a good title, I often am not really clear about why I'm making a particular image (not necessarily a bad thing). Sometimes I'll just write "Title??" in my exposure record and try to think of something later if I decide to print that negative.

What I do try not to do too much is limit the viewers' responses to my work by limiting them with a title. That's sometimes challenging too.

As for changing a title? Sure, why not? Just inform all your buyers that have already purchased that photo under a different name that they now have an "originally-titled" collector's item and that the value of their purchase just went up.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Peltigera]

I have always believed that only weak photos need titles. However there are exceptions. I have only given titles to two of the photos that I have entered. That was because I doubted that most people would have the background to see the connections that I saw.

You could be a bit devilish and give your photo a fanciful name like Eunice or Pepper #30. You could say that you are paying homage to Edward Weston. That might pique some curiosity in the viewers. You would also be making a statement against a silly rule. A friend of a friend of mine in college did something similar. Each semester you had to fill out a religious preference card. You had to put down something to be considered as having fully registered. Considering that it was none of the school's business and majoring in architecture he neatly entered "red brick."

I don't title my photographs for my own use but I belong to the Lincolnshire Artists Society and they insist on a title for everything exhibited at our exhibitions. I use imaginative titles like Flower 1, Flower 2, Flower x.

 

[Bill Burk]

Had breakfast with my wife yesterday after dropping the kids off at something they had to do... A friend of mine has some work up at the place we went for breakfast. He'd done a show at the local art center a couple years back where I first saw his photograph taken at a paint factory. The walls of a tank were spattered with paint, and this shot shows a streak of orange accent standing out against other random colors.

I don't think it had a title when I first saw it, but my first impression was that it looked like a carp and we talked about it a bit.

It's now titled "The Fish".