DSLR Photography Forum

How important to you is the title to a photograph?

Do you give all/some/none of your photos a titile?
What makes a good title? A bad title?
Can a title make or break an image?
What are some great/bad examples of titles of photographs?
What style of titles do you like/dislike? Do you prefer understated/factual titles such as "Afternoon Wheat Field #2", or perhaps more poetic/emotive titles such as "Prisoner of Hope", or maybe even tongue-in-cheek/comedic titles like "The great teddy-bear rampage"? (Note that I just made those titles up, they aren't the names of real photos as far as I'm aware).

In the last week or two, I've seen and been involved with a couple of discussions involving the titles of images, and I thought it was interesting enough to post as a thread of its own and get some opinions.

While I'm sure we'll find this is quite a personal thing, are there any particular things or examples you can think of which should just be *banned* from being used as titles? If so, why? Are they offensive, cliche, immature, boring, or just stupid?

The camera club to which I (briefly) belonged did not allow titles as part of their competitions. The attitude was: if the picture needs explanation, then it obviously doesn't convey your message. I tend to agree - for competitive submissions, I think titles should not be used and the images should speak for themselves. But for general web posting they can be fun and/or informative.

I think that a good picture doesn't need to be explained. It has to speak by itself. On the other hand, I think a title is like to point the viewer in some direction. Just so.

Here is my example:

My pictures was entitled "Chess a winter game"



I just think if I would have entitled "Board game" or "Intelligence entertainment", it would have been seen from a totally different point of view. I would like to say that I don't complain about the critique that gentleman wrote about my picture, at the contrary. I thank him very much because thanks to his comment I started to paying attention to my titles.

Personally I think titles are so much waste of effort - it would be a pretty sad photo that would be made or broken by a title - a picture is supposed to be worth a thousand words - right?

On the other hand, for my art show coming up, I need to title all my works for potential sale, and my wife said all of my titles were rubbish - which they are because I don't care about them. I asked her to retitle them, and she has come up with some good things that do actually influence the perception of the photo (a little).

For example my photo "Tree in the Snow" was retitled "New Year's Day" and the whole photo feels much more "optimistic" as a result.

So what am I saying? I guess I can see it both ways, but I prefer to leave the titles for the "Marketing" people.

I for one, think a title can definitely add to an image. Don't get me wrong, an image needs to stand up on its own merit, but sometimes, the title can convey just that little bit of bonus factor to the viewer. Especially when the title is "clever" or adds a twist - the viewer is engaged both on an artistic (oooo I think the little birds are pretty) and also an intellectual level (ooooh so that's what the title means).

I totally agree that an image needs no title but I may put a title to an image when posting it on a forum such as this. That's it. Those title are usually quick and come to mind right away with little thought.

For my camera club judging, color and monochrome images don;t have the titles read.... photojournalism and Nature do have a titles read, and a poor title will affect your score, such as a wrong name for a plant or animal, or an image that doesn't match the title for Photojournalism.

I think it depends on the image and the intention of the photographer. I think a title can add, detract, or remain neutral with an image.

EnglishBob brings up an interesting point with his camera club - where certain genres of photography have their titles read while others don't.
I kind of feel a similar way I guess.
Certainly for photojournalism and nature; knowing the name of the place, event, animal or plant is helpful and is usually part of the title.

But I also think titles can be useful (or harmful) when used for other photos. They can be used to give context to an image and lead the viewer to see the image in a certain light, for better or worse. Toad gives a good example of a title that works really well with his "New Years Day" example.
But other (IMHO bad) examples are those motivational photos you see on the walls in office buildings. The photos themselves are often lovely, but the single word "leadership" or "strength" or "goals" or whatever is written under the photo (which is almost always mounted on a black matte for some reason) has become such a cliche to me that I cringe every time I see one. I think such photos and titles have been taken from photographers and become the commodities of HR personel and managers who don't have a creative bone in their bodies. They don't actually care about the message at all, they just want their workers to work harder and make more money. Cynical aren't I? hehe.. I'm sure a lot of people are less jaded than me and think these images and titles work wonders - maybe I just associate them with certain people in my past

Here's a link to a site that makes me want to kick my computer in anger: http://www.motivationalartposters.com/

I think that in general giving an emotive title to a creative photo can be risky business (unless you happen to be a good writer as well as photographer). If you pull it off then it can turn a good image into a great one, but if it doesn't work then it can kill the image, make it pretentious or cliche. For the most part, I'd agree that leaving the image to speak for itself is the safest option in most cases.

But having said that, I think a well thought out tongue-in-cheek title can work well for some images. It keeps the mood light and airy and lets the viewer know you don't take yourself too seriously. It also makes browsing through a gallery a lot more entertaining.
Adam sent me this link to a local Perth photographer's gallery, and quite apart from the images he takes I really enjoy the titles and comments he writes to accompany his work. I'd love to have a gallery as compelling as his.
He has titles such as "Stinkiest fart in Tokyo" and "Make lunch, not war" which sound rediculous, but really suit the images and help you see the world through someone else's eyes. It is definately one of my favourite galleries on the web at the moment.

Here's the link:
http://www.pbase.com/hinius

Oh, and Irma, I think your original title of "Chess a winter game" is great given the obvious winter background and feel of the photo. What were the arguments against it? That chess isn't a game, its "so much more than that"? Or was it because people play chess in summer as well? Stick to your guns! I liked your original title the best, and certainly think that some reference to winter in there helps the image.
In fact, If I had to think up an alternative title (which I don't think it needs), I'd lose the reference to chess before losing the reference to winter.... I think the chess aspect is fairly obvious in the image so does it need to be mentioned. What about "Waiting for winter's end" as a title? Not only does it give a chilly winter feel, but by "waiting" for something it links into the clocks in the image and the passing of time. It is simply implied that chess is what goes on while waiting for winter's end.

Kombisaurus Wrote:But other (IMHO bad) examples are those motivational photos you see on the walls in office buildings. The photos themselves are often lovely, but the single word "leadership" or "strength" or "goals" or whatever is written under the photo.

Then you should find these highly amusing...

http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/demotivation.html

...many gems such as this...

Adrian:
There were two main points; that my background was not wintery enough. He suggested me to take the picture near a window that had frost or some snow in the window panels. The second point was that despite the concept was interesting, the game was over, and there were nobody around. So that suggested they were probably gone.

I have to say I tried, to set everything in a window but I couldn't get it. Everything was blown out. The picture was not the picture I imagined at the beginning, those day we didn't have any snow and the motivation or inspiration was gone.... As I said, he was very kind and gave a nice complement to my work. I thought about changing the name, but I didn't.

I think some of my pictures are my inspiration. I want to say something with a picture. Sometimes I stage with things my thoughts or feelings and take pictures, silly perhaps, but probably it is a way to communicate or express what one think or feel.