Thursday Post 2-19-08
Titles
"The importance of Titles in Art is immense, as it gives a meaning and a purpose to the artwork. In fact, the Title of an artwork is one of its most artistic and important things. The meaning of the Title usually is interwoven throughout a piece of art and is often times hard to understand."
-Annette Labedzki Abstract Painter
"Titling Photographs". Photo.net. 01 Aug. 2001. 18 Feb. 2009. http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?topic_id=23&msg_id=001LCt
Though this is a forum more than an actual article, I found it very interesting to see the opinions voiced about the process and necessity of titling photographs. It all started when Ted Kostek posted
"I saw a photographer peddling his wares at a show a while back. His photos were nice, but didn't grab me particularly. Not until I noticed that every image had an arresting title.
For example, there was a photo of two large leaves together on a pond and one small leaf a bit farther off. The title was "How Parents Feel." By itself, the photo seemed nice, but nothing special. The title added a whole new level and made it striking and emotionally evocative. I have come to understand that every good photo has a definite idea. Presumably, this photographer put his/her idea in the title, and that's why it was effective. What does anyone think about this?
On the one hand, it clearly helped to communicate with me, and I assume it helped to communicate with others.
On the other hand, this practice could be construed as too heavy handed and limiting: "This is the way to look at this image; no other is acceptable."
Thoughts?"
After this, as with most forums, there were some very good responses and some relatively ignorant responses, and the conversation began to slowly deteriorate until the original idea was lost and one person was merely caught up in arguing their point of view over and over. However, before this happened, a few posters mentioned titles serving as "a mockery". This intrigued me the most, as I am aiming for something close to this affect in my work, and so far my only idea has been to use titles, as I said on my last critique response. At first I felt a little like this was a shortcut, since so much work in the fine art world remains untitled, and there seems to be a constant debate about the use of titles. When Malaika was presenting her work and talked about wanting to use titles, it began to occur to me that it was in fact a completely legitimate way to influence the meaning of the image. Plus, I have always wanted to incorporate words with my art, and have generally been steered away from it because of the difficulty of combining text and image. But with titles, my words can exist outside of the visual framework of the image while retaining a powerful influence over the image. I've had a few ideas about titles for my work that would essentially twist phrases that we might already know in order to slyly reveal the true elements in the picture. So far I have "Barking up the Wrong Cliff", and I'm trying to think of a version of "Slide into Space" that would better reference a known phrase. I like these titles because they seem to reference what the viewer sees, but they actually begin with the real object depicted in the picture. I don't know if I'll necessarily stick to this pattern, because for my coral reef picture that is made from an image of lichen on a rock I've been thinking of something like "Lichen the Reef" or "Fish lichen good" (I'm adding a fish that I photographed at the aquarium in VA Beach). I'm also working on a piece that appears to be waves but is actually a rock, and I'm trying to photoshop in a turtle that I have photographed, and I'm thinking of the title "Trapped Between a Rock and a Turtle Shell" or something like that. However, I'm not sure if the turtle is going to work, and I might have to switch it to a shark or something.
"I Have This Friend"
"The importance of Titles in Art is immense, as it gives a meaning and a purpose to the artwork. In fact, the Title of an artwork is one of its most artistic and important things. The meaning of the Title usually is interwoven throughout a piece of art and is often times hard to understand."
-Annette Labedzki Abstract Painter
"Titling Photographs". Photo.net. 01 Aug. 2001. 18 Feb. 2009. http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?topic_id=23&msg_id=001LCt
Though this is a forum more than an actual article, I found it very interesting to see the opinions voiced about the process and necessity of titling photographs. It all started when Ted Kostek posted
"I saw a photographer peddling his wares at a show a while back. His photos were nice, but didn't grab me particularly. Not until I noticed that every image had an arresting title.
For example, there was a photo of two large leaves together on a pond and one small leaf a bit farther off. The title was "How Parents Feel." By itself, the photo seemed nice, but nothing special. The title added a whole new level and made it striking and emotionally evocative. I have come to understand that every good photo has a definite idea. Presumably, this photographer put his/her idea in the title, and that's why it was effective. What does anyone think about this?
On the one hand, it clearly helped to communicate with me, and I assume it helped to communicate with others.
On the other hand, this practice could be construed as too heavy handed and limiting: "This is the way to look at this image; no other is acceptable."
Thoughts?"
After this, as with most forums, there were some very good responses and some relatively ignorant responses, and the conversation began to slowly deteriorate until the original idea was lost and one person was merely caught up in arguing their point of view over and over. However, before this happened, a few posters mentioned titles serving as "a mockery". This intrigued me the most, as I am aiming for something close to this affect in my work, and so far my only idea has been to use titles, as I said on my last critique response. At first I felt a little like this was a shortcut, since so much work in the fine art world remains untitled, and there seems to be a constant debate about the use of titles. When Malaika was presenting her work and talked about wanting to use titles, it began to occur to me that it was in fact a completely legitimate way to influence the meaning of the image. Plus, I have always wanted to incorporate words with my art, and have generally been steered away from it because of the difficulty of combining text and image. But with titles, my words can exist outside of the visual framework of the image while retaining a powerful influence over the image. I've had a few ideas about titles for my work that would essentially twist phrases that we might already know in order to slyly reveal the true elements in the picture. So far I have "Barking up the Wrong Cliff", and I'm trying to think of a version of "Slide into Space" that would better reference a known phrase. I like these titles because they seem to reference what the viewer sees, but they actually begin with the real object depicted in the picture. I don't know if I'll necessarily stick to this pattern, because for my coral reef picture that is made from an image of lichen on a rock I've been thinking of something like "Lichen the Reef" or "Fish lichen good" (I'm adding a fish that I photographed at the aquarium in VA Beach). I'm also working on a piece that appears to be waves but is actually a rock, and I'm trying to photoshop in a turtle that I have photographed, and I'm thinking of the title "Trapped Between a Rock and a Turtle Shell" or something like that. However, I'm not sure if the turtle is going to work, and I might have to switch it to a shark or something.
"I Have This Friend"
Labels: Thursday
posted by Megan Wagner at
12:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home