Weekly poll: Do you title your photographs?

[Nicole]

I was about to post a question just in general, but I changed my mind and decided to make it a weekly poll instead So, the question is: Do you title your photographs? And of course, my real question that's behind that is how do you decide what to title them?

I've toyed around with several ways of giving my photographs titles for Flickr. I prefer to give them titles even if they are uninspired. But, recently I've been playing with some smoke photographs and calling them "Smoke [1]", while accurate, doesn't quite cut it. Of course, with event photos, they are often titled with the event (especially when I can't think of something), but lately I've been trying to get more creative with titles (the smoke series is an exception). But I find myself struggling to come up with titles more often than not. Especially with the more abstract photos.

Of course, titles are also important for the Critique my Shot threads because it's often the title that makes you read the thread. So how do you come up with your titles, or are you one of those people who just labels it "Critique Please"

So, the question is: Do you title your photographs? And how do you title them? And if you have any suggestions for how I (and others) can come up with better titles, can you share them?

[shazzt]

I don't normally title my photos (too lazy) but I have been doing it for my 365. Usually just random things that pop into my head at the time (and the day number so I can keep track!). I wish I could think up some more exciting ones than I have so far

[Tiberius]

I usually give them short titles, although I try to make it something evocative in simplicity. because I'm too lazy to type much. (*points at posts explaining why cameras have x-synch speeds.*:P)

[wulf]

I like to give all of my shots a title, although I generally go for a prosaic description of the the content rather than anything fancy - eg. "Leaf Macro - 1", "Leaf Macro - 2" (although, in some cases, I will be inspired with something less obvious).

I don't like to see pictures that have no title or just the filename generated by the camera. If browsing someone's Flickr stream I am likely to look further if pictures have been titled and tagged rather than just dumped; a lot of that probably comes from the fact that titling does take time and implies at least some level of selectivity whereas a bunch of shots with the default names are probably everything the person took on a given session.

When making more permanent storage of the images, I give a filename that gives a clue to the subject, the date the picture was taken and, if necessary, a number in a particular series, eg. leafmacro.20071020.02.jpg. That should help me find the image even when I have moved onto future systems and perhaps software like iPhoto is no longer available.

Wulf

[jiminyClickit]

Starting at the moment of deciding to photograph a subject, it has a quality that caused me to take the time to register it on the card to the best of my ability. Included in that moment is knowledge that, displaying it will require an investment of more time to get through transferring to PC, Adobe, Flickr and DPS. That time is when a title choice is made. Being lazy or not having time doesn't enter into it, as a title carries a lot of responsibility. Your intention can be explained by it, your sense of humor displayed, how you feel about a subject clearly suggested.

Hand someone a business card without a name on it; it's not as effective.

For my own storage/filing, often it becomes a matter of subject/number (as Nicole said)), when it has not "spoken" to me as a photo. When a photo is purely a record of a previously often-shot subject, its title will take even more time to discover. Until then, it has a personal label that will tell me what it is, based on some memory only important to me.

[rediguana]

Nope - I just use the filename.

Given the propensity of some programs to mangle exif data, all my photos have a filename that records the datetime of the shot. E.g. 20071027-225000.dng. I get LR to rename the file and it of course takes that as the title on import. I've found this to be very useful after using a program that has mangled the exif because I can then use the filename to reset the exif data.

Everything else that is textual is, or is going to, end up in the metadata instead. It is nice having reasonably compact filenames for all the photos.

That and I can't be bothered titling my photos. I'd rather be taking photos than trying to spend time naming them

[peeperita]

for the first few years with digital, i titled every image before storing it....then, came the day i was gifted with a digital photo frame and i began a project of loading it with images from an annual party my husband and i throw.....i thought it would be great for my guests to see a slide show of themselves evolving over the 14 years this event has been taking place.......

then i realised that even though when they were on my disks in their own folders i never had to worry about duplicate file names ....it would overwrite on the frame....quite a few shots had to be renamed to get them in there.....

also, when i would go through my edited pic disks....that's what i like to call them....and i would see an image i wanted to print or worry with some more in photoshop....i had a devil of a time finding the right disk of originals to retrieve what i wanted.....

so, for the past while and for the future i do not name them....it is easier for me to look at the file number to find the right disk.....

i think myself organized until i look at posts like wulf's, where he takes the time to set the date in the name.....

now, for the threads here at dps, i name them.....and i take my cues from mister clickit, who has advised, on more than one occasion, that an image should be named something besides a dead on description of the subject....a title that would ask the viewer to look a little closer...

so, there....my novella is complete.....

thanks

peeper

[Digidave]

I just use the camera's file system's name. When i use Nikon's Capture NX, I have the ability to save all the post-processing steps that I used on the RAW file. So, I just name & save that file using the camera's file name. So, if I ever want to reproduce a picture for printing or whatever, I just need to bring up the original RAW file in Capture NX & use the post-production steps file(I'm not sure what to call it) to get the exact same picture every time.

[windrider86]

I am really bad at that. If I am doing a lot of photos all at once i do not. If i am placing one on a web site then yes i do title but its usually something simple that pertains to the subject

[velvet4269]

There needs to be 1 more option: I do a little of all of the above.

Most of the time, I don't bother with titles, but every so often, one of the photos is just begging for a title. Sometimes, the title helps make the photo (without a detailed explaination). And sometimes, I just can't come up with anything creative