[robgski]

Though Phtography is a visual medium, a simple title along with the image being posted adds a lot to the presentation as a whole, especially if the image is of a place or subject not immediately recognizable.

Anything is better than "IMG_DSC1_20190817" when posting to Social Media

While the obvious title of "Landsape1, or "portrait" is better than the file info, a little effort makes a better posting

For example, this is a range of mountains and a valley, but the title gives one a sense of place
Shenandoah Valley Overlook



Sometimes, the title can lead the viewer into examining the image for context,
Question SI2
or give some continuity to a series of photos:
Answer SI 2

For an abstract photo, a title can really convey what the image is meant to present
Revelation 13

A clever bit of wordplay or a pun also works, IMO Walk Like an Egyptian BW

I also find that trying to create a title gives me a bit more impetus to compose, edit or crop the photo a bit more carefully.

---

Last edited by robgski; 08-18-2019 at 10:01 AM.

[dms]

For me usually I want the image to have possible ambiguity, multiple meanings, or the meaning/context is obvious, or whatever. Anyway I would hope/prefer they work w/o a title.

On the other hand one of my exceptions is a photo of a hen and her chicks in front of a store selling stuff for tourists--on a famous Key West street. In this case for most people the photo requires a title so they can say: "Aha."

[stevebrot]

I usually provide titles, but often they are not particularly descriptive or on the other extreme simply another way to state the obvious. A recent example is titled "Pastel Strand" and yes, it is a photo of a beach with a pastel palette. For a sampling of strange titles...

fotostevia | Flickr


Steve

[tvdtvdtvd]

Photography, more so than any other medium, does seem to foster a lack of titles when photographs are presented as art(ifacts). My best guess is
an assumption on the behalf of the artist that the photorealistic nature of the medium doesn't require a title to explain it. Perhaps this has some merit,
as a photograph of a red poppy is indeed self evident. A water color or resin sculpture of a red poppy also may be self evident, yet works in those
mediums seem more likely to get titled.

Personally, I'll admit my brain reads "unimaginative" whenever I see a photograph (or any artwork) presented without a title. The subject may indeed
be self evident, but a title is a chance for the artist to further the impact of the image presented. Paul Klee is a personal favorite of mine who has
elevated the title as a key component of his art. On the other hand, I'm mindful of something Cristo once said during a lecture: "Can't an artwork
simply be a beautiful thing? Must it have a meaning?"

"Untitled" may indeed leave the interpretation up to the viewer. I think I'll forever see it as a missed opportunity. Alternate interpretations are always
possible regardless of title, but that title is the artist's chance to state what the subject meant to them.

[StiffLegged]

On the other hand, a certain photographer gives the location of all his images on InstaGroan as Mesa Arch, whether they're otherwise titled or not. He's making a serious protest about geotagging images leading to overcrowding at some locations. It also irritates the heck out of other InstaGroaners.

BTW, I really like Steve's Veins of Artifice.

[biz-engineer]

What's in a Name, or Why don't all PF Members post their images along with titles?

Shouldn't camera settings (exif) be enough?

[thazooo]

Of the very few I post on PF, none are titled.I consider PF a gear site. My Images I put on my Gallery site, Titled. Stark White background doesn't do it for me.

[timb64]

Sorry just too lazy.

All my images are posted from Flickr where they are arranged into Albums giving brief details of the location or theme.

[stevebrot]

On the other hand, a certain photographer gives the location of all his images on InstaGroan as Mesa Arch

I guess that explains the people waiting in line to take "the shot" at Mesa Arch.

BTW, I really like Steve's Veins of Artifice.

What can I say other than the title is descriptive?


Steve

[ramseybuckeye]

I'm with you Rob. It's not that hard to add a title, unless you are uploading scads of photos. Tags are also something I wish more people would use. I try to add tags to all of my photos, that makes them much easier for me to find. Tags also don't take that long once you get it to a routine. Exif is interesting too, it baffles me how so many photos are stripped of exif. That always makes me a little suspicious.

[jacamar]

I title most of mine but not all. The title is usually the location or name of the feature or the species if it's a creature or plant. Just a bit of context- the rest is open to interpretation. I prefer it when the poster provides his/her residence location to help me with geographic/cultural context but of course that might not indicate the person's cultural background or where the shot was actually taken. I value ambiguity in my images but as often as not it arrives as a bonus when I open the file rather than something planned or contrived.

[StiffLegged]

.I consider PF a gear site.

As do I. No implied criticism, it's just how I read the site.

[paulh]

I title most of mine but not all. The title is usually the location or name of the feature or the species if it's a creature or plant. Just a bit of context

My thoughts as well, jacamar.

[kevinWE]

Would #1, #2,... and so forth be considered a title? :-)

[ramseybuckeye]

I title most of mine but not all. The title is usually the location or name of the feature or the species if it's a creature or plant. Just a bit of context- the rest is open to interpretation. I prefer it when the poster provides his/her residence location to help me with geographic/cultural context but of course that might not indicate the person's cultural background or where the shot was actually taken. I value ambiguity in my images but as often as not it arrives as a bonus when I open the file rather than something planned or contrived.

I think you nailed it there. I have taken photos of species of plants and animals that I could not ID and stated so (recently a turtle), hoping someone would help ID them.

Would #1, #2,... and so forth be considered a title? :-)

It could be in the right context.