Is text in photos boring?

[susanm]

Over <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Lto3">here</a>

Eugene said it is, most of the time. I'm wondering if that's true. Do you have

any pictures that prove otherwise?

 

(I'm still a newbie on this forum, if this post in is the wrong place please let

me know.)

[susanm]

.<div></div>

[susanm]

Huntington Beach, CA<div></div>

[emre]

Generalizations like this will get you nowhere. Consider each picture on its own merits.

[geoff_foale]

It depends on your sense of humour. Sometimes I go to a lot of trouble to include suitable wording.<div></div>

[Matt Laur]

Some signs are just worth it, since most people just plain wouldn't encounter them otherwise.<div></div>

[petemillis]

Susan, I like text in photos sometimes. It all depends on what the photographer is aiming to achieve. There's a picture I took of some people, a building and a bit of land with trees ripped down. If it wasn't for the text on banners being held by the people then nobody would have any way of knowing that the trees had been illegally ripped down by a property developing firm. And some text in pictures is just plain funny. Things that people say about other people's work are just their own personal opinions, and by no means can their opinions be taken as represenatitive of the concensus of the rest of the people who will see the picture.

[machts gut]

Oh, I love text in photos. Did you ever check out Duane Michals?<div></div>

[john_h.1]

A peril of being a newbie is to take forum comments too seriously. Especially one sentence ones that concern subjective opinions such as certain types of photos being boring. Each image should be viewed on its individual merit, not arbitrary criteria like whether there is a cat in it, if it taken inside a car or contains some sort of writing.

[bloosqr]

this isn't a thread about lolcats? :)

[Brad_]

Shoot what floats your boat...<BR><P>

<center>

<img src= "http://pages.sbcglobal.net/b-evans/Images19/SFWeb%207-08-07/image/

stop.jpg">

</center>

[machts gut]

John Hennneberger wrote: "Each image should be viewed on its individual merit, not arbitrary criteria like whether there is a cat in it, if it taken inside a car or contains some sort of writing."

 

I agree with you, that words like "boring" are misleading, but the question is nevertheless interessting. It concerns different ideas of visual perception and processing of information. Photography is a visual art and therefore may underlie different rules of processing (e.g. it may have a bigger emotional impact) than they way we perceive written speach, which is far more abstract and demands knowledge of the language.

On the other hand text in photos can add meaning or, more interessting for me, can puzzle and amuse the viewer (see my example of Michels photo) in bringing together diverging meanings.

 

Stefan

 

P.S. Sorry for spelling Mr. Michels name wrong. Duane Michels is a well known photo artist since the 60ies.

[jamesb]

<center>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10048624-lg.jpg"><p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10046743-md.jpg"><p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10051599-lg.jpg">

</center>

[eugene_scherba]

Jeebus Christus, people, you don't get jokes or what?

[eugene_scherba]

And, yes, most of the pictures in this thread are boring.

[susanm]

Haha! I thought it was an interesting question, anyway, although I didn't meant it very seriously.

 

That "take an additional 25% off" is hilarious.

[robert_m_johnson]

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/robert_m_johnson/530169958/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1342/530169958_a5cd29246c_o.jpg" width="600" height="403" alt="I Need Ones" /></a>

[ingermargrete]

Photographs document life and history - why should not signs (and other text) be a part of that, they are all around us:)