Titles

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,124
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Nothing ruins a good picture like a title.

Not sure who said/wrote it but lately, I find myself agreeing with this sentiment. I like the way Stephen Shore titles his photos in his early work (maybe he still does?). He simply uses the place and date - "Dallas Texas, June 1976" and leaves the rest up to the viewer. I like that. I don't like to be told what to see - which is all too often what the title does.

What are your thoughts on how to title a photo?
 

Dali

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,864
Location
Philadelphia
Format
Multi Format
I find titles to be too often conceited or meaninless in a sense that it does not bring anything more than the picture.
 

Pieter12

Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Messages
7,736
Location
Magrathean's computer
Format
Super8
i whole-heartedly agree. Location and date and maybe the name of the subject, are really all you need. Additional information can be included as a caption (I think of Diane Arbus's work in "A Box of Ten Photographs") to give better understanding of the subjects or situation involved, but poetic BS makes me nauseous.
 
Last edited:

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
I make sure to title my photographs, every time. sometimes I even say NSFW, nothing like click bait
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,614
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I like and use titles, because assigning a label to something one shares helps people to communicate about that something.
If you share your work with anyone, they make it so much easier to enter into a remote discussion about that work.
Some times they can be fun as well - my postcard in round 52 of the Photrio Postcard Exchange is a scene from under a bridge, which I had fun by giving it the title "Troll Search".
In a relatively small percentage of cases, the title is important to understanding the context of a photograph, and therefore the photograph itself. I see no reason not to take advantage of that.
 

ignatiu5

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
334
Location
Philadelphia, USA
Format
Medium Format
I used to not title anything for the reasons given by the OP: I didn’t want to bias a reaction. I almost always title things posted online now, for the reasons @MattKing suggests. While I shoot a lot of genres, most of what I post online involves model photography, and it’s for the purpose, generally, of having models see my work and similarly want to work with and/or hire me. It’s much easier, in my experience, for them to remember and refer to a title than a date or a code when we are discussing things they like, or don’t.

I don’t particularly care one way or another how others refer to their own art; it's not any of my business.
 

Maris

Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
1,577
Location
Noosa, Australia
Format
Multi Format
Titles? Yes, to refer to one photograph instead of another in a critique or a catalogue without having to fully describe the visual content every time.
Captions? Occasionally, if there is interesting narrative content associated with the photograph.
Untitled? Never, even if the word "untitled" is followed by a Roman numeral (or suchlike) to set the order of a series of photographs: too pretentious.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,480
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
No, I will state the location and or date though.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,614
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

MurrayMinchin

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
5,481
Location
North Coast BC Canada
Format
Hybrid
I prefer to let a photo stand on its own without any help from me. The viewer brings their own life experience to the party and my intentions, directed by a title, might get in the way of their equally valid interpretation.

They are “titled” more for organizing than anything.

Canoona Falls, Princess Royal Island, north coast B.C. is my avatar, for example.
 

jvo

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 6, 2008
Messages
1,761
Location
left coast of east coast
Format
Digital
titles can provide context - especially for a single image.

think of "migrant mother" by dorothea lange... if you weren't familiar with the picture and i titled it "my son returns from the war" it would be a different context for the same picture, different meaning.

and yes, something titles can be pretentious, or difficult, or no help, think "untitled."
 
Last edited:

Vaughn

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
10,190
Location
Humboldt Co.
Format
Large Format
I do everything I can to influence the viewer with my work; subject matter, light, composition, contrast, framing -- why not a title, too?

Usually place and date...but occasionally more. The below image was conceived with the title.

"Mistaking the Map for the Territory", 4x5, 150mm lens, 16x20 silver gelatin print.
 

Attachments

  • Mistaking the Map for the Territory, YNP_16x20.jpg
    853.4 KB · Views: 107

Renato Tonelli

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
1,480
Location
New York,NY & Pontremoli
Format
Multi Format

This is the approach I have taken of late.
A lot of photographers are very resistant to captions, but occasionally, a caption can go a long way to make a viewer understand why the photograph was taken.

e.g. A few years ago I photographed a rustic fountain made of local stone; it is well made, comes out of the side of the mountain, the water is super cold and very good; people stop to bottle it up and bring it home. That's not the reason I took the photograph; I was told that in 1918 my grandfather was taking his very ill child to the hospital and realized that his son had died in his arms when he reached the fountain. Without a caption, much of the meaning that I get from the photograph would be lost on the viewer.
 

Ko.Fe.

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
3,209
Location
MiltON.ONtario
Format
Digital
To me good photos needs no titles. I don't see titles under HCB, GW and VM photos. VM photos came as bunch of negatives and they are all good without titles.

Title for photo is like telling anecdote to someone who needs to be explained why it is funny.

But description then and where it was taking is very good option, IMO.
 
OP
OP

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,124
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
I really bristle at being told what to see or how to interpret the picture. It's feels like being bludgeoned.
The other day, I saw a picture with a clever title, the title was a play on words that related to the subject matter. It was telling me what to see. I hate that. The picture would have been much better if the title hadn't told me what to see.

I strongly agree that titles are necessary to help distinguish one picture from another - to allow one to easily and unambiguously refer to a specific picture in conversation for example - but please, do not tell me what to see.
 
Last edited:

faberryman

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
6,048
Location
Wherever
Format
Multi Format
I am not a fan of titles. Too much trouble to think them up, and when I do, I can’t remember them, so I have to look on the back to remind myself. I not a famous photographer so I am not too concerned about making critics’ and historians’ jobs easier. I had a show a couple of years ago, and got some of those push pins with numbers on them so that my images could be easily referred to. The push pin number was easily as enlightening as a title.
 
Last edited:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,480
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
If I do not see it, the photographer missed it. Rarely does a photograph NEED a title but sometimes it is needed for clarification. Whatever floats your boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…