Titling shots,unnecessary evil or worthy companion?

[5n4pdr4g0n]

Hi,

In my opening post in the welcome thread https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/arse-about-face.632869/ I touched upon a pet peeve of mine which is untitled pictures, I don't mean each and every one ever taken or those archived but generally those that you consider worthy of sharing via whatever social medium you choose be it here,500/Flickr or even Facebook.

Another member ianp5a suggested that a photograph shouldn't need a title as it should be self explanatory when shot and presented correctly, am I being a complete fruitloop in my thinking? should as Ian suggests a picture be strong enough to stand on it's own and be open to the viewers imagination as to what the photographer was trying to capture and portray?

Just wanted to see what others thoughts and opinions on the matter are.

 

[ianp5a]

Just to clarify, I was referring to my own pictures. Where I am not particularly interested in renaming the file name. I'm sure everyone has a different idea. For a documentary shot the location or description might be useful. But for me, I'll not feel the need to rename an aesthetic shot.

 

[5n4pdr4g0n]

Sorry Ian I hadn't meant to misrepresent you I'll link to the original thread for clarity's sake

 

[ianp5a]

I understood from your original point you might have meant the file name was part of good presentation. Like a physical frame on a print?

 

[5n4pdr4g0n]

I understood from your original point you might have meant the name was part of good presentation. Like a physical frame on a print?

Brilliant, that's a complete nail on the head moment and one I wished I'd come up with!!

It won't make a lousy picture fantastic but it can add to it surely? A good title can provoke thought and enhance a picture is where I'd say I stand on the matter, thanks Ian.

 

[ianp5a]

I might consider it if it was for a competition. Sometimes there are requirements. But just to put on Flikr or here, then not.

A physical frame, to me, shouldn't distract from the picture. But be as neutral as possible. And digital frames make me shudder. Maybe a thin black or white line is needed to separate a light picture from a light background. But the big wide ones are a distraction. And worse when viewed on a mobile device. But I digress.

 

[frod]

Place and year.

 

[Nod]

DSCN1234 is good enough for me! I know what it's of and will add that in any explanation text when posting shots on here (if the explanation's necessary.) One of my pet peves is people wasting pixels on a frame when posting images on here (and elsewhere) - let's see more of the shot rather than wasting a few hundred pixels on nothing around the picture.

 

[odd jim]

I don't think an image has to have a "title", why would it? Mine simply are titled by explanation. I sometimes cringe when I see overly elaborate or inappropriate titles of grandeur on images

 

[5n4pdr4g0n]

Just me then, works for me heh quite happy to be an oddball

 

[Harriers9]

I like to see a descriptive title to an image on Flickr and suchlike. Not DSC12345 copy 6

Nothing annoys me more seeing a shot of some incredible looking place and no idea where or what it is. The title should go someway to telling you that or maybe in the tags?
I know, I'll click through and look for the tags. No nothing. No description, no tags and no title just loads of people saying what a fantastic image it is but not asking where it is.

 

[5n4pdr4g0n]

I like to see a descriptive title to an image on Flickr and suchlike. Not DSC12345 copy 6

Nothing annoys me more seeing a shot of some incredible looking place and no idea where or what it is. The title should go someway to telling you that or maybe in the tags?
I know, I'll click through and look for the tags. No nothing. No description, no tags and no title just loads of people saying what a fantastic image it is but not asking where it is.

I'm guilty of that to a lesser degree, I usually have at least a general location unless it's obvious (Blackpool tower in the background etc) I'm the same with exif info, I'd like to know what was used in terms of equipment and settings etc.

 

[troutfisher]

I like to see a descriptive title to an image on Flickr and suchlike. Not DSC12345 copy 6

Nothing annoys me more seeing a shot of some incredible looking place and no idea where or what it is. The title should go someway to telling you that or maybe in the tags?
I know, I'll click through and look for the tags. No nothing. No description, no tags and no title just loads of people saying what a fantastic image it is but not asking where it is.

Quite agree, what is the point of posting a photo and not going to the trouble of saying what and where, it adds a lot more to the picture

 

[ianp5a]

Nothing annoys me more seeing a shot of some incredible looking place and no idea where or what it is. The title should go someway to telling you that or maybe in the tags?

Aha! Here we go. It's quite reasonable to expect some background information. Maybe in the form of a "title" as you say. However this is where Flikr, and others, probably for practical reasons, display the file name as if it was a title. There is provision to set a location. Which will help with a scene, but not an animal species or vehicle make and model, which might also be the crucial piece of missing information.

I sometimes add the location. But adding that and other information is a chore. And doesn't always travel with the picture. So is lost again.

However, this information is more documentary information, and not an emotive title. As per the OP.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


All my picture keep the number they got from the camera.
Some pictures will be named when they are part of an ex-
position… otherwise, they keep the camera number.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Documentary information is useful on a site like this or sometimes Flickr. Titling an image can often just be pretentious or pointless unless it's a necessary part of the story IMO.

 

[the black fox]

i have always taken the point of view that if you can't see a title for a pic jump out at you then neither will anyone viewing it .what your saying with a title is what went through your mind as you composed the shot and by that i mean on the computer not in camera .to just post photos with out a title takes you back to the days of happy snappers with a box brownie