Why not meaningfull titles and descriptions on photos?

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by nitromike

They felt .. not there was a need for. It was their opinion.

So, Context is not important? There are things which are opinion but some opinions count more than others.

Some how Adams saw titles in that light.

At least we have know the context of the photos here.

Nor do all photos do a good job in conveying what ever the photographer was seeking to express and a title provide a starting point for a meaning constructive criticism.

[xseption]

I do like titles myself ... but sometimes the title can bias the interpretation of the artwork and thus hinder the experience

~ edd

[photobykim]

A title does impact the way a person will view an image, I've had many highly regarded photographers tell me that the title can affect someone to see the image differently than if it was just untitled.

I personally dont title mine because I am using the proof files I use for my clients and for them I need the event to be in order by number and like someone else said I'm kind of lazy about going back to retitle an image because the majority of the time I am using the same image I use for my clients and having it stored twice on my computer doesn't make sense to me.

But I also see and understand the point made in the original post!

[scott1120]

Originally Posted by photobykim

A title does impact the way a person will view an image, I've had many highly regarded photographers tell me that the title can affect someone to see the image differently than if it was just untitled.

I personally dont title mine because I am using the proof files I use for my clients and for them I need the event to be in order by number and like someone else said I'm kind of lazy about going back to retitle an image because the majority of the time I am using the same image I use for my clients and having it stored twice on my computer doesn't make sense to me.

But I also see and understand the point made in the original post!

But, you are probably not posting your proofs to TPF. And like someone already mentioned OP was talking about photos in the TPF galleries. Surely people are not storing their money making images on TPF.

[photobykim]

scott -- i am not posting my proofs on tpf for my clients to view, no. but when I do post images of my work to my gallery it is the same image I used on my online site for their proof. does that make sense?

I understand what the orginal post was about and that it is talking about the galleries we post our images in here on the site.

[Mike G]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

So, Context is not important? There are things which are opinion but some opinions count more than others.

Some how Adams saw titles in that light.

At least we have know the context of the photos here.

Nor do all photos do a good job in conveying what ever the photographer was seeking to express and a title provide a starting point for a meaning constructive criticism.

So we're back to .. do you let the title of an image set your thinking of the image, or do you look at the image for the image itself? For me I could care less what an image is called .. its about what is captured.

[Daniel Bates]

I guess the filename title is the digital equivalent of the "Untitled #6" naming convention?

[xseption]

Originally Posted by Daniel Bates

I guess the filename title is the digital equivalent of the "Untitled #6" naming convention?

Similar to the photo titled Pepper No. 30 mentioned previously?

[Daniel Bates]

Right--but even that was named Pepper something!