On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 08:26:51AM -0000, Bob W wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > My recent question to Tom C and his response provoked a topic for
> > discussion. Unless you object of course ;-).
> >
> > Do you think that truly excellent photographs require no
> > title? Do you
> > think that sometimes giving a "No Title" will actually be
> > good for the
> > photograph and the viewer?
> >
> > What do you say?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Boris
>
> Titles are either cloyingly twee and sentimental, or they are the
> photographer's way of telling you what to think, or both.
>
> Photos don't need titles, they need captions: who, what, when, where,
> why.
>
> A photographer who uses a title is the unholy spawn of Thomas
> ('Painter of Light') Kinkade. How can any healthy-minded person read
> titles like "Serenity Cove", "Home is Where the Heart Is" or "Amber
> Afternoon" without immediately losing their lunch?
>
> Not even Ken Rockwell uses titles.
So am I using titles or captions?
http://www.jfwaf.com/PAW/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
