Loved reading this. I have just started a masters in visual and critical studies and I'm excited to begin having conversations like this one ... and also a bit daunted because I'm a smart girl but I feel like there's a whole language that I am not versed in!
Thanks Kathryn! I saw a post recently that mentioned your return to studies. I dunno, maybe it's because I'm back to school too, but I just think it's so cool. Nat Persoglio's going back to school this month too! Middle-aged and student discount. Glorious. While critical studies are only a small part of my overall photography course, it's something I'm (clearly) excited about so I'm up for long discussions on the topic as the year goes by.
I do think giving photographs a title is debatable and ultimately boils down to an aesthetic / strategic choice by the photographer. We photographers can suffer from the curse of too much information; we know all about the photograph, but the viewer comes at it cold. Compositionally a photo should stand on its own, but contextually it may not. "Warsaw, 2019" may have meaning for you, but could be Greek to me and background research may not help. A non-documentary street photo's date or location may be meaningless to the image itself, while a creative or informational title could secure its meaning and enhance the viewer's appreciation for it. I respect your choice, and I believe a title can do more harm than not, so "tread carefully" Is always the advice to offer. But i think it important to critique the choice of title or no title on a case by case basis.
Captioning has a place. It can be used to devastating emotional effect. However, I do feel it can too often be used in an attempt to cover a multitude of sins.
Let's say in my first photo I had captioned it "Wroclove". (This is a local affectionate nickname for the city). That's an acceptable caption based on the content of the photograph. Could be sincere or read as ironic given the look on the faces of the couple. That's all fine and well, though it may be considered a little heavy-handed given the content of the frame.
Let's say, however, there's a hypothetical photograph of a man and a woman sitting at either end of a bar. Minding their own business. Not together. One may be even waiting for a partner to arrive. A caption of "Wroclove" bestows meaning to the photo that doesn't exist and if implying some tryst between the man and woman, it is inherently dishonest. It is reaching for meaning that isn't there.
I feel the Wrocław photo speaks for itself. It is not for me to tell the viewer how to feel about it. A note that didn't find its way into my essay above was "Responsibility for interpretation belongs to the reader". I love that photo, by the way, and I have had people interpret it in several different ways. I have confidence in those who will read my photographs to find their way to an interpretation, even if it's not one I share.
It's important to me though that you and other readers understand I'm not dogmatically stating one should not caption photographs, and this is no judgement on those who do. Not at all. I'm saying that a poor photo is a poor photo is a poor photo. I've made plenty of them. No florid caption will make it otherwise. A caption should complement the content of a photograph, it should not grant the photograph meaning that is not present in the picture itself.
Robert Frank wrote that "the visual impact should be such as will nullify explanation." I don't always meet that goal, but I strive for it each and every time. :)
I'd like to see or get more detail off what you mean here: "My own particular bête noire is a poor photograph masked by the photographer bestowing upon it unconvincing intention or an interpretation with all the substance of a homoeopathic remedy. "
Hi Mark... Thanks for the comment. I separated this bit towards the end, as I was conscious it was more subjective than the rest of the essay.
In every masterclass or group critique I've attended, or portfolio review or school class I've led, someone will try to put lipstick on a pig. This is the calling card of the inexperienced or lazy photographer. It's excusable in beginners, less so for the more experienced.
The key here is my desire to see good work. If the photo is good, a photographer can do or say what they like. The work stands for itself. Who am I to argue? If the work is poor, then it's a lazy and often brazen attempt to cover for bad photography. Hashtag-streetphotography is rife with empty, substandard fare hiding behind waffle.
A banal photograph that offers little may be accompanied by a pseudo-intellectual explanation or statement of intent the length of a Wagner cycle, none of which is present in the photo itself. With certain conceptual and artistic exceptions, I feel photographs shouldn't need a commentary track. (As shown above, I hope, photographs can say enough in and of themselves).
The other foul ball is to give the photo a faux-poetic caption with no correspondence to the content of the photograph whatsoever. It's an attempt to give the photograph meaning not shown in, nor implied by the picture.
The most egregious example of this I once saw on Reddit was a nothing photo shot from far across a street, of some anonymous girl pausing outside a clothes store to check her phone. Setting aside that these cliched pictures are 10-a-penny online, this one was a particularly artless snapshot. It had the ubiquitous hashtag-streetphotography, and the caption "Waiting for the future". Meaningless.
I make great efforts to steer clear of gatekeeping in street photography as I experienced enough of it over in the music biz, and I don't want this to be mistaken for that. We all have our irrational irritations, and this one is mine. :) It's why, with very few exceptions, my photos are always captioned simply by location and year.
I hope that makes sense. :) And thanks for reading, man. 🫡
Thanks, Neil, a thought-provoking piece, which I feel may be a pre-cursor to the types of discussion I'll be privvy to at uni! Never thought I'd say that ;)
Looking forward to more content like this to keep me ahead of the riff-raff!
By profession, I'm a writer. By love, I'm... well, I'm a writer again, but I have always loved using my camera. I'm not a street photographer, being more tempted to capture macro shots in nature. But I found this post to be an excellent description/analysis of photography in general. When I look at my own shots, I ask: "Is this a photograph or a snapshot?" And the answer always has to do with "Does it make me feel something? If so, what?"
Hi Neil - an interesting article - thanks. It got me thinking about how often these days we barely pause long enough to look at an image to really see it for what it is - before doom scrolling to the next one. I like this idea of ‘describing and interpreting’. It means having to pause long enough to really think about the image - what it is and what it’s saying. I for one need to spend more time thinking about what images are saying, and not just what they are.
Thanks Jon - much appreciated! Instagram, Tiktok, and others have had a deleterious effect on the collective attention span. Even Substack hasn't escaped. I came to Subby as I was tired of social media and my writing tends towards long-form. Of late, there has been a lot of talk about readers, on average, simply not reading past 1000 words. There is so much content thrown at us on a daily basis, it is a wonder we keep up at all. Returning to photography, I like the comment you made. Without expressing it, I think I do have a desire to see people appreciate photos rather than glance and move on. Given how popular this post has been, I will certainly return to this well to discuss it further. Cheers!
Good points here, Neil..These guidelines are informative and useful in a deeper appreciation and understanding of a photograph. I would add though that at the end of the day, reading photography is subjective. And, these approaches aid the viewers to cultivate their own tastes.
Hi Stella. Of course. I agree. In my essay, I covered only describing and interpreting photographs in an attempt to guide readers to a better understanding, not to judgment. For word count and sanity, I opted to leave evaluating for another time. Though I will cover it at some point in the future, I'm sure.
Thanks, Xavi. The more interest this post gets, the more I feel it would be a fruitful spin-off. Maybe to have its own section. When I have time I'll sketch down some thoughts.
Oh, I'd like to see some of them. I live in the north on the west of the river, in Bielany... so I tend not to spend a lot of time in Praga, however, I've recently bought a bike so I hope to go over there much more in Autumn.
There's so much involved. I could write as much or more again and still not really make a dent. And even then I didn't venture into evaluation or theory. I'm glad it's being seen as a good intro though - particularly by peers and those I respect. :) Cheers.
These are some salient points and puts a framework around discussing photos to which my own personal willy nilly approach could surely put to good use. Good start Neil, looking forward to more like this.
Thanks, man. I'm a couple of months away from a year on Substack, and after my anniversary I plan to add a couple of new sections to Photos, mostly. One may be something that expands on this topic so it's good to know it's coming in useful.
Cutting my customary, garrulous 2k+ words to a more manageable length, I feel like I only just scratched the surface too. I'm glad you got something from it. :) Cheers!
Loved reading this. I have just started a masters in visual and critical studies and I'm excited to begin having conversations like this one ... and also a bit daunted because I'm a smart girl but I feel like there's a whole language that I am not versed in!
Thanks Kathryn! I saw a post recently that mentioned your return to studies. I dunno, maybe it's because I'm back to school too, but I just think it's so cool. Nat Persoglio's going back to school this month too! Middle-aged and student discount. Glorious. While critical studies are only a small part of my overall photography course, it's something I'm (clearly) excited about so I'm up for long discussions on the topic as the year goes by.
Definitely up for that! Love being back in school at this age and stage of my life and so excited for you and Nat too!
Thanks, @kathryn, I just spotted this :)
I do think giving photographs a title is debatable and ultimately boils down to an aesthetic / strategic choice by the photographer. We photographers can suffer from the curse of too much information; we know all about the photograph, but the viewer comes at it cold. Compositionally a photo should stand on its own, but contextually it may not. "Warsaw, 2019" may have meaning for you, but could be Greek to me and background research may not help. A non-documentary street photo's date or location may be meaningless to the image itself, while a creative or informational title could secure its meaning and enhance the viewer's appreciation for it. I respect your choice, and I believe a title can do more harm than not, so "tread carefully" Is always the advice to offer. But i think it important to critique the choice of title or no title on a case by case basis.
Captioning has a place. It can be used to devastating emotional effect. However, I do feel it can too often be used in an attempt to cover a multitude of sins.
Let's say in my first photo I had captioned it "Wroclove". (This is a local affectionate nickname for the city). That's an acceptable caption based on the content of the photograph. Could be sincere or read as ironic given the look on the faces of the couple. That's all fine and well, though it may be considered a little heavy-handed given the content of the frame.
Let's say, however, there's a hypothetical photograph of a man and a woman sitting at either end of a bar. Minding their own business. Not together. One may be even waiting for a partner to arrive. A caption of "Wroclove" bestows meaning to the photo that doesn't exist and if implying some tryst between the man and woman, it is inherently dishonest. It is reaching for meaning that isn't there.
I feel the Wrocław photo speaks for itself. It is not for me to tell the viewer how to feel about it. A note that didn't find its way into my essay above was "Responsibility for interpretation belongs to the reader". I love that photo, by the way, and I have had people interpret it in several different ways. I have confidence in those who will read my photographs to find their way to an interpretation, even if it's not one I share.
It's important to me though that you and other readers understand I'm not dogmatically stating one should not caption photographs, and this is no judgement on those who do. Not at all. I'm saying that a poor photo is a poor photo is a poor photo. I've made plenty of them. No florid caption will make it otherwise. A caption should complement the content of a photograph, it should not grant the photograph meaning that is not present in the picture itself.
Robert Frank wrote that "the visual impact should be such as will nullify explanation." I don't always meet that goal, but I strive for it each and every time. :)
I'd like to see or get more detail off what you mean here: "My own particular bête noire is a poor photograph masked by the photographer bestowing upon it unconvincing intention or an interpretation with all the substance of a homoeopathic remedy. "
Hi Mark... Thanks for the comment. I separated this bit towards the end, as I was conscious it was more subjective than the rest of the essay.
In every masterclass or group critique I've attended, or portfolio review or school class I've led, someone will try to put lipstick on a pig. This is the calling card of the inexperienced or lazy photographer. It's excusable in beginners, less so for the more experienced.
The key here is my desire to see good work. If the photo is good, a photographer can do or say what they like. The work stands for itself. Who am I to argue? If the work is poor, then it's a lazy and often brazen attempt to cover for bad photography. Hashtag-streetphotography is rife with empty, substandard fare hiding behind waffle.
A banal photograph that offers little may be accompanied by a pseudo-intellectual explanation or statement of intent the length of a Wagner cycle, none of which is present in the photo itself. With certain conceptual and artistic exceptions, I feel photographs shouldn't need a commentary track. (As shown above, I hope, photographs can say enough in and of themselves).
The other foul ball is to give the photo a faux-poetic caption with no correspondence to the content of the photograph whatsoever. It's an attempt to give the photograph meaning not shown in, nor implied by the picture.
The most egregious example of this I once saw on Reddit was a nothing photo shot from far across a street, of some anonymous girl pausing outside a clothes store to check her phone. Setting aside that these cliched pictures are 10-a-penny online, this one was a particularly artless snapshot. It had the ubiquitous hashtag-streetphotography, and the caption "Waiting for the future". Meaningless.
I make great efforts to steer clear of gatekeeping in street photography as I experienced enough of it over in the music biz, and I don't want this to be mistaken for that. We all have our irrational irritations, and this one is mine. :) It's why, with very few exceptions, my photos are always captioned simply by location and year.
I hope that makes sense. :) And thanks for reading, man. 🫡
Thanks, Neil, a thought-provoking piece, which I feel may be a pre-cursor to the types of discussion I'll be privvy to at uni! Never thought I'd say that ;)
Looking forward to more content like this to keep me ahead of the riff-raff!
I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's looking more likely that this type of content will become an off-shoot of the more regular street stuff. :)
By profession, I'm a writer. By love, I'm... well, I'm a writer again, but I have always loved using my camera. I'm not a street photographer, being more tempted to capture macro shots in nature. But I found this post to be an excellent description/analysis of photography in general. When I look at my own shots, I ask: "Is this a photograph or a snapshot?" And the answer always has to do with "Does it make me feel something? If so, what?"
Hi Neil - an interesting article - thanks. It got me thinking about how often these days we barely pause long enough to look at an image to really see it for what it is - before doom scrolling to the next one. I like this idea of ‘describing and interpreting’. It means having to pause long enough to really think about the image - what it is and what it’s saying. I for one need to spend more time thinking about what images are saying, and not just what they are.
Thanks Jon - much appreciated! Instagram, Tiktok, and others have had a deleterious effect on the collective attention span. Even Substack hasn't escaped. I came to Subby as I was tired of social media and my writing tends towards long-form. Of late, there has been a lot of talk about readers, on average, simply not reading past 1000 words. There is so much content thrown at us on a daily basis, it is a wonder we keep up at all. Returning to photography, I like the comment you made. Without expressing it, I think I do have a desire to see people appreciate photos rather than glance and move on. Given how popular this post has been, I will certainly return to this well to discuss it further. Cheers!
Good points here, Neil..These guidelines are informative and useful in a deeper appreciation and understanding of a photograph. I would add though that at the end of the day, reading photography is subjective. And, these approaches aid the viewers to cultivate their own tastes.
Hi Stella. Of course. I agree. In my essay, I covered only describing and interpreting photographs in an attempt to guide readers to a better understanding, not to judgment. For word count and sanity, I opted to leave evaluating for another time. Though I will cover it at some point in the future, I'm sure.
That makes sense! Looking forward to reading more along this topic.
Very good post, Neil. I think you're just scratching the surface of a very, very deep rabbit hole. I look forward to reading more about this.
Thanks, Xavi. The more interest this post gets, the more I feel it would be a fruitful spin-off. Maybe to have its own section. When I have time I'll sketch down some thoughts.
I spent some memorable time shooting the Praga District. Love that neighborhood. One of my favorites.
Oh, I'd like to see some of them. I live in the north on the west of the river, in Bielany... so I tend not to spend a lot of time in Praga, however, I've recently bought a bike so I hope to go over there much more in Autumn.
Good points addressed here, Neil. Great starting points for a decent discussion. Thanks for sharing.
There's so much involved. I could write as much or more again and still not really make a dent. And even then I didn't venture into evaluation or theory. I'm glad it's being seen as a good intro though - particularly by peers and those I respect. :) Cheers.
These are some salient points and puts a framework around discussing photos to which my own personal willy nilly approach could surely put to good use. Good start Neil, looking forward to more like this.
Thanks, Jason. So far, there's been enough good feeling around this one that I think it may go further into the future. :)
useful things to take in consideration? hell yes!!! very useful!
Thanks, man. I'm a couple of months away from a year on Substack, and after my anniversary I plan to add a couple of new sections to Photos, mostly. One may be something that expands on this topic so it's good to know it's coming in useful.
please do! if you keep it like the above one, i think it will be not only very successful but also very helpful
Having never formally studied photography there is a lot of thoughtful pointers here. Thank you Neil.
Cutting my customary, garrulous 2k+ words to a more manageable length, I feel like I only just scratched the surface too. I'm glad you got something from it. :) Cheers!
I'm sure you could have written more but it's still a very good introduction.
It is my experience as a Photographer nobody understands the process of actually taking a picture, the joy and reward is yours..