Don't want to be a party pooper ... but the titles??

Agnieszka

I appreciate the fact, that the titles don't say out loud what your take on the photos you posted is. BUT "4 from Angie" does not sound appealing to me.

Sorry guys, but I don't feel like clicking on any of the last posted threats. I do like minimalism, and I hate when the title takes away the thoughts I could create, but how about we simplify it, but still make the viewer interested / CURIOUS enough to click on the threat? ++++ I might really enjoy looking at some certain photos, but if I go back a few days later, I will not remember which post it was that I was interested in.

I think it's one thing when you put a title below a photo in a gallery (displayed on a wall), but it's a different thing when we're talking about threats in a forum

Dunno. Just my 2 cents :dunno

(And yes, I do know it's an ... exercise you guys are doing here)

Richard

Agnieszka wrote:

I appreciate the fact, that the titles don't say out loud what your take on the photos you posted is. BUT "4 from Angie" does not sound appealing to me.

Sorry guys, but I don't feel like clicking on any of the last posted threats. I do like minimalism, and I hate when the title takes away the thoughts I could create, but how about we simplify it, but still make the viewer interested / CURIOUS enough to click on the threat? ++++ I might really enjoy looking at some certain photos, but if I go back a few days later, I will not remember which post it was that I was interested in.

I think it's one thing when you put a title below a photo in a gallery (displayed on a wall), but it's a different thing when we're talking about threats in a forum

Dunno. Just my 2 cents

(And yes, I do know it's an ... exercise you guys are doing here)

I tend to agree. One can distinguish between picture titles and thread titles on a forum. The latter are not helpful if they contain no information. I have been out of town and am just getting caught up, or I would have moved all those posts to a single thread. Since the exercise ends tomorrow, I think I'll just let it be. The point of the exercise, of course, is that images must speak for themselves without using titles as a crutch. I think we have all seen how silly titles can get in the Dgrin Challenges, so I don't think there are any surprises here for most of us.

sweet caroline

I do agree that it's impractical for long term, and before I found B.D.'s thread I wondered what was up with all the numbers instead of titles.

Caroline

Wil Davis

Agnieszka wrote:

snip…
but it's a different thing when we're talking about threats in a forum
…snip

It's exactly as Richard describes…

…and I didn't think it was all that heated

- Wil

bendruckerphoto

I agree. I don't like the "# from Person" nomenclature.

Awais Yaqub

Oh Ohhh, I was wondering what happened to everyone ! i forgot we are suppose to post pictures without titles

Anyway, i think we need to find some alternate approach

Richard

Awais Yaqub wrote:

Anyway, i think we need to find some alternate approach

Just to be clear, we are not permanently changing the way threads are titled. You can title your threads however you want and post all the commentary you like. These posts were in response to a clever exercise BD came up with. Even if you don't participate, you will benefit from considering its point.

divamum

Would it be worth having one large thread devoted to those shots? Just a thought that might keep all parties happy (or at least make it entirely clear which shots are being submitted as part of the exercise). Could get ungainly, I suppose, but just a thought.

richtersl

Don't sweat it
These titles are from folks who are partaking in a 3-day challenge started by B.D.:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=140350

Richard

divamum wrote:

Would it be worth having one large thread devoted to those shots? Just a thought that might keep all parties happy (or at least make it entirely clear which shots are being submitted as part of the exercise). Could get ungainly, I suppose, but just a thought.

It would have been a good idea to do this from the start. If I merge them now, the comments will appear in chronological order, which means that you will not necessarily know which post the comments applied to. I don't think that would improve matters. Let's just let it be, OK?

Agnieszka

No worries, I don't think it bothers anybody THAT much ... I'm just saying that I don't see the point in the way it has been done (and that's not a critique against you, Richard)

I do agree, it would have made more sense if all of the images would have been in one threat ... but no need to change anything now, just hope we'll go back to *some sort* of titles at some point

Also, if you look at the titles in the wedding forum it's not like those are killing the threats, but you remember / know immediately if you want to look at the post or not ... just saying

Tina Manley

I agree with B.D. on this one. The photos should speak for themselves. If I have to explain what's going by using a caption, I am not communicating successfully with the photo alone. The only captions I usually use are the names of the people in the photo.

Tina

www.tinamanley.com

Agnieszka

Tina Manley wrote:

I agree with B.D. on this one. The photos should speak for themselves. If I have to explain what's going by using a caption, I am not communicating successfully with the photo alone. The only captions I usually use are the names of the people in the photo.

Tina

www.tinamanley.com

I didn't say the photos shouldn't speak for themselves.

gvf

I think it depends on how the title is put. "Old Man Wishing He Were Young" is hitting you over the head and deprives viewer and the photo of any freedom.
But "Face of Old Man" identifies what it is enough so people on a forum can choose what they might be interested in looking at that visit. Like at an art museum, I pick what I might be interested in and concentrate on those. Do another genre the next time or at another museum.

heatherfeather

And on a more practical note, it is dang hard to search for a particular type of photo for ideas if all you have for keywords / titles are "Three from Moses." I mean, maybe I really want ideas on how to shoot the crossing of the Red Sea? But I sure can't find 'em that way.

But I do understand the concept of not putting thoughts into peoples heads...

And I think I myself tend to be in love with the aptly written word almost as much as a good photo. So it is harder for me to enjoy the loss of titles.

(I understand, Angie................... and BD. )

Richard

heatherfeather wrote:

And on a more practical note, it is dang hard to search for a particular type of photo for ideas if all you have for keywords / titles are "Three from Moses." I mean, maybe I really want ideas on how to shoot the crossing of the Red Sea? But I sure can't find 'em that way.

But I do understand the concept of not putting thoughts into peoples heads...

And I think I myself tend to be in love with the aptly written word almost as much as a good photo. So it is harder for me to enjoy the loss of titles.

(I understand, Angie................... and BD. )

Just to reiterate, this is an exercise, not a way of life. We are not doing away with titles. It's OK to post color shots, too.

Nikolai

I think a simple prefix uniting all those submissions would help to isolate the BD class assignments from the "random" posts and thus clear the confusion. Just a thought...

WingsOfLovePhoto

Thanks for bringing this up Angie... I thought I was going a little crazy! I didn't see BD's thread. I also look through the forum looking at titles that I might be interested in and as Heather mentioned as a search. Unless I am doing a BD exercise I will continue as I always post. If that is ok

goldilocksandmy3bears

it's only fun if your participating in the challenge l:D

michswiss

As I mentioned in one of my semi-titled threads, I think this concept works better in the physical world where the viewer can see the images without having to be bothered by the text.