Why/How/Do you name your photos?

[agp]

I see a lot of great photos on this forum. There are many photos with titles - some are clever, some are serious, and some are very suitable. However, there seem to be a trend in "marketing" that is shown in naming of photos simply for the sake of getting people to click on the thread.

Nothing personal against the OP, but I remember a week ago, there was a thread on general photos board titled "naked selfie". Now, we (we as in us men) know it is not what we think it is / want it to be, but that thread still has more clicks on some of the most amazing photos from my photographer on this board - Chris Crossley. I, too, was curious what photo was in the thread, and I, too, knew that the title was probably a jovial attempt at getting people to view a thread that may have contained the most amazing photo inside, but I did not open the thread and I won't. It's like one of those countless articles on Business Insider titled "You have been [doing something] wrong your whole life" or "The only thing/advice you need to be the best at [something]". I mean I understand that in photography, like in journalism, the author needs to capture the viewer's attention at the earliest step possible, but when does charming one's interest through witty rhetoric become begging for one's attention through desperate plead?

 

[mmaria]

This will be interesting thread.... and mods will be moving this... maybe to reconsider the title of this thread, totally not what I expected to read inside...



As for the titles, I always have troubles when naming my threads

 

[acparsons]

Rant over?

 

[agp]

I'd just call it my observation of a media phenomenon. Not a rant, just something I feel passionate about. If my neighbor is gardening wrong, I wouldn't bother to write a sentence on it.

 

[Designer]

I don't think I have ever named one of my photographs. Perhaps if I had something really good, and was hoping that it would be accepted in a fine art competition, then I might put a name on it. I think even that would depend on whether a title would improve it or in some cases harm it. Everyone seems to treat this according to his own taste or habit.

The other thing you mentioned is naming the thread, which we do either by an actual name or just some reference to the content. How critical is it that your thread attracts lots of hits?

Is it important to you that the thread gets hits, but far less important that there are any replies at all?

 

[480sparky]

I use names because Western Vista sells better than DSC_5414.

 

[pixmedic]

I don't have to name my photos...my camera does it for me. Isn't technology wonderful?

 

[Civchic]

I name my photos by date_pic order_name (ie May 13 001 cardinal perched) so that I can easily catalogue them and find what I'm looking for in a document list without having to view thumbnails (which both gives me a headache and makes my computer run slower).

As for thread titles, I'm not that creative, I just try to be descriptive. But if people want to click my "zoo trip sunday (pic heavy)" they can, and if they don't, no biggy.

 

[robbins.photo]

I had a great system all setup in which all of my photo's were named in a non threatining, non marketing kind of way. I just called them all "Bob".

Unfortunately I found this system doesn't work all that well, as everytime I shoot a new bob the old one gets overwritten. So I decided the heck with it - put a date time stamp on them in front of whatever the gibberish the camera comes up with, and since I'm getting into the habit of shooting two cameras now I will usually add a quick descriptor of the lens used, normally either S200 (for my sigma 70-200), N85 for the Nikkor 85 mm or N50 for the Nikkor 50 mm. That way I can very quickly tell what lens was used without checking the EXIF data, and it keeps them seperated into directories of the same name, just makes it easier to find stuff.

 

[sm4him]

I see a lot of great photos on this forum. There are many photos with titles - some are clever, some are serious, and some are very suitable. However, there seem to be a trend in "marketing" that is shown in naming of photos simply for the sake of getting people to click on the thread.

Nothing personal against the OP, but I remember a week ago, there was a thread on general photos board titled "naked selfie". Now, we (we as in us men) know it is not what we think it is / want it to be, but that thread still has more clicks on some of the most amazing photos from my photographer on this board - Chris Crossley. I, too, was curious what photo was in the thread, and I, too, knew that the title was probably a jovial attempt at getting people to view a thread that may have contained the most amazing photo inside, but I did not open the thread and I won't. It's like one of those countless articles on Business Insider titled "You have been [doing something] wrong your whole life" or "The only thing/advice you need to be the best at [something]". I mean I understand that in photography, like in journalism, the author needs to capture the viewer's attention at the earliest step possible, but when does charming one's interest through witty rhetoric become begging for one's attention through desperate plead?

What exactly is wrong with desperate pleas for attention? :lmao:

Seriously: At least as far as I'm concerned, you're really asking two different questions here. "Why/How do I name my photos?" and "Why/How do I title THREADS for my photos in a forum?" They are two completely separate issues.
I name SOME of my photos, for a variety of reasons. Primary among them:
1. The photo just lends itself to a title. For example, I have a photo of a wren, holding a piece of moss. You can't see its head, because the moss is bigger than its head, so it looks like the moss IS the bird's head. I call it "Chia Wren."
2. To evoke something specific from a photo. I might have a photo that could stand on its own, BUT for some reason, I *want* to help move people to a particular way of interpreting it, or a particular emotion when viewing it. Take a lonely old country road, with a man silhouetted in the distance, traveling the road with his dog. People will interpret that photo in all sorts of ways. But name it "Moving On" and now they are at least being "encouraged" to see a story in it. Name it "Lost" and they see a whole different story. (NOTE: This is a gross generalization, backed up with poor examples, but hopefully gets my thoughts across. A title CAN cause us to at least lean toward a particular interpretation)
3. I'm entering it in a juried exhibit. Because so far, every juried exhibit I've entered wants the "title" of each piece you submit.

BUT, the question you seem to be REALLY asking is about how we title our threads--and I'll admit, I title mine, *sometimes* to try to get people's attention and get them to open the thread. Because they CANNOT give me feedback or anything else if they never SEE the thread. You can call that "begging for attention" but it's just a FACT that this forum, like most forums, is just JAM-PACKED with threads, started every minute of every day about a huge variety of topics and themes. If I've bothered to post a thread at all, it means I think it's something worthy of some attention--but if it doesn't GET that attention pretty quickly, it'll fall right off the Active Topics page and die a horrible death of neglect.
So, we title threads to try to pull people in. Once you pull 'em in, they either like your photo or they don't, that's up to them. But I gotta get them IN there to look at it first, and if that means I title my thread, "Naked Selfie Wrapped in Bacon," well, you do what you gotta do.
I mean after all, if I didn't CARE whether people viewed the thread/photo or not, I probably wouldn't bother to post it in the first place.