Captions or Titles, well descriptions mostly so I guess you can call
them what you will.
John Francis wrote:
> 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/
>
>
>
--
--
The more I know of men, the more I like my dog.
-- Anne Louise Germaine de Stael
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
