Continuing with the short series of blurred out passersby on a pedestrian street in Daegu, South Korea. This one is important, in that over the past few months I have realised that people walking into the frame can actually enhance a photograph. Before I would lower the camera when scenes became a little busy or too full. But now I feel it can add rhythm and fluidity to a scene. I like isolation of characters in my photographs, drawing the viewer into the scene with the focus just being on one individual. This one is a little different. It is cool. I am beginning to see how to see things differently. Pleased with that.
The iPhone photograph for today comes from Korea also. When I first posted this on Instagram I gave it the title “Anarchist”. I was struck by the petrol can to her right and the look of innocence she projected. I imagined her plan. You can imagine it too.
Photography is fun, no? And giving street images titles is part of it. But street photography must be the only art form that gets all snooty about giving titles. All art forms have titles – it is funny the one that documents human activity in its dynamic form has to be stripped of the artist’s interpretation and a uniformity of titles with only the place name and date are considered OK.
How bland – how cold is that!? How void of personality – how conformist – how utterly lacking in imagination – how full of pretension that the image needs to speak for itself. A good image will speak for itself no matter what.
The street photographers on Flickr whose work I follow kill me with titles. So often their images suck me in and stop me and when I read the title I am elevated, brought to places with a cleverness, a wit, a vision that is genius. You can click on the links to see their work.
Ya, there are images that have place names and dates that are class, but the photographers must have felt something when they took the shot and when they viewed the image. The image must have sparked some emotion in them. Why not couple that with the image? Why not let the viewer into that part of the story? I do not get it. Can someone fill me in?
And you know, it has affected me. At times, I m trying to be inspired by my image to attach an appropriate title and I chicken out and just give it the title of the place where it was taken. This has to stop!
I was wondering whether to carry one using titles or not… Until I read your text: I’ll carry on with the titles but will have to think harder. Thanks!
The photostream of Angelo Rodriguez shows well that a good title adds even more interest (his are pure genius and I feel ashamed when comparing mines).
Thanks for visiting the blog. You know I find it an interesting topic. Personally, I think when titles are good they add so much to images, but if they are anyway weak they can leave the viewer with a negative impact. I find that when the titles come, they come and if they don’t there is no point in pushing it. For street images, giving location and date seems a standard way to title them, but I don’t like to follow rules – if I feel a title is appropriate I give it.
Am a big fan of Angelo’s work. Will check your stream now.