On Naming Prints - by Mike Busby Photography, CPP

     We have all been in the position of titling prints and finding that nothing seems to work. We have seen ill-conceived titles, or flat titles describing the obvious. There are confusing titles that become distractions, and we have seen humorous and clever titles that completely miss the mark. Coming up with good titles can be tough, and you are not alone in this struggle. The very nature of language interferes and runs in opposition to visual imagery. I’d like to shed a little light on why titling is tough, and share some practical advice and resources for generating interesting and compelling titles.

            How we process language is different than how we interpret visual imagery. Everyday use of language is conditioned to be direct, concise, descriptive, and to explain. Visual communication fosters exploration, interpretation, and it evokes emotion. Language is how we describe the world; visual imagery is how we feel it.

            Of the senses, people trust most their vision and sense of touch, and they are critical and skeptical of language. We believe what we see and touch, and we trust conclusions derived from our own interpretations. Images open spaces for consideration without outside influences. We are free to experience, roam, dream, and make whatever associations we wish, and our minds thrive in this environment. Language, on the other hand, is analyzed as a fact claimed by someone else. It is critically weighed against the credibility of a speaker who is trying to persuade us. We experience the visual — we judge language. A poor title immediately prompts critical judgments before ever entering the image. Think of a time when you heard a confusing title. Did you “enter” the image right away, or was your time spent analyzing the intent of the author? Poor titles are painful because they distract from the interpretive freedom of visual works. There isn’t much guidance on generating titles, but we can take what we know about language and shift it to our benefit.

            Rather than viewing titles as explanations or obvious descriptions, we can view them as just another design element. A good title is not an explanation, but an introduction. Our titles should support and resonate with specific themes, narratives, and design elements present in the image. It emphasizes certain aspects, and it guides the viewer through the image. Below are some examples of shifting titles to support design elements and narratives.

"The Meadow"  © 2016 Mike Busby Photography

Potential titles for this image were “Three Elk,” “Yellowstone,” and “The Secret Meadow.” I felt compelled to let the viewer know there were three elk within the image, but “Three Elk” detracts from the feel and it changes the image into a “Where’s Waldo.” “Yellowstone” is good if Yellowstone is buying the image, but a physical location narrows the potential audience. I liked the “The Secret Meadow,” but it seemed off. In the end, I went with just “The Meadow.” It is simple to understand and enables the viewer to jump right into the image. The simplicity of the title also enables this meadow to represent any meadow relative to the viewer’s experience, and by extension it becomes more appealing to a broader audience.

"Life" - © 2016 Mike Busby Photography

Another photo from Yellowstone, originally titled “Bison at Lamar Valley.” A descriptive and flat title, but again, I felt compelled to tell people where this photo was taken. This particular image received a lot of attention and it demanded a better title. “Life in Yellowstone” and “The Life of Bison” emerged as well as some other titles. I finally used “Life.” “Life of Bison” points to family connections between the Bison, but “Life” reflects family connections between all animals — including the viewer.

 

"Still Nights" - © 0216 Mike Busby Photography

        This is an infrared image of Riverfront Park in Spokane. “Riverfront Park” was the first and obvious name, but again, it is flat and stale. Calm emerged as a word to describe the image, and a thesaurus search derived “Still.” “Still” matched the mood, and it reflected the water elements of the image. I entertained a lot of thought between “Night” and “Nights.” In the end, “Night” felt singular and it isolated the image, whereas “Nights” evoked the passage of time and worked well with the clock tower. Night felt descriptive — nights felt emotive. In the end, the title supports the mood of the image, but it is vague enough for the viewer to interpret and form their own conclusions.

     The nature of this article is not to get you to agree with my titles, but to present a new approach that will help you generate stronger titles with confidence. What has and has not worked for me is listed below.

1.     View titles as introductions, or as design elements to support narratives and themes.

2.     Avoid describing the content — it is flat and redundant.

3.     Keep it simple and generic — The more generic the name, the broader the appeal to your audience.

4.     Use a thesaurus. Describe the feel of the image in a word or two, and then use the thesaurus to generate alternate names.

5.     Share your titles with people you trust. If they find them confusing, then most people will find them confusing.

6.     Do not be clever. Cleverness is reflective of the artist — not the image.

7.     Avoid being humorous unless the intent is clearly obvious, and get a second opinion. Humor tends to narrow audience appeal because it forces a specific interpretation by the author. Using humor means you are expecting chuckles rather than ooohs and ahs.

8.      Modern photographers are not poets, but poetry is crafted to evoke emotion. It is worth your time to explore.

9.     Do not cast a title in stone. Titling is like everything else in photography — it improves through time. Return to old images, reflect, and refine.

10.  Is the narrative present without a title? Using a title to explain an image is a crutch; it is indicative of a weak image, and everybody knows it.

11.  Do not use camera generated file names. It implies the photographer has little to no processing or file management skills, and by extension — it reflects someone very new to photography.

12.  Use “Untitled” with caution. Untitled is meant to mean an image stands on its own, but if it is read out loud, then it is framed and interpreted with the imagery. It can reflect a lack of creativity on the part of the photographer.

If you are naming images only for yourself, or for your art, then name as best you see fit. However, if you plan to submit your work for public showings, as commercial work, or for competitions, then pick names that add and support your work. Titles are not necessary evils, but very real opportunities to strengthen and support our images. Take your time, ask for second opinions, and work to develop your naming skills. We are a creative group and we spend a lot time on our craft, and strong titles can manifest everything we want our images to be.