How much does the title affect the response of viewers/voters?
When I am looking at photos on the site: I tend to see the picture then I look at it some more. If it interests me enough I let my eye drift to the title and then I look at the image again and see if the title fits, says something about the picture that I missed or is unhelpful.
I am inspired to go with a looong title in the current challenge, but am wondering if this will be a disservice to my entry?
Some folks even omit a title. I believe that this field is required when submitting, that's why people may put a period (.) or underscore (_) for a title.
I personally don't like long titles. You shouldn't need to explain the image with the title. 2 or 3 words is best, I think.
Agreed. I have seen cases where the title has been the saving grace for some photos which first bordered on DNMC. Without the title, I wouldn't have known their 'take' on the challenge.
The title is an accessory to your entry. Like any accessory, it can complement, distract or be ignored. Always try for the first option. ;-)
I see it this way too.
My pet peeves:
Sentences in place of titles....are like a diamond necklace with a cotton dress.
Cryptic forum-speak symbols (such as ^_^)....are like a bandana with a tuxedo.
Titles that use the challenge topic....there's bokeh in the left eye of the second pig from the left....(if it's in the image then it's in the image, saying it won't make it so)
No title at all (usually, but not always)....if you don't know what it is, if it doesn't carry any story or emotion, then what could it possibly mean to me?
Title "X" and image of an "X"...as in no title, if it's a picture of a ball (and that's obvious) and when you, the author of the image, look at it all you think is "ball"...well, you've probably missed the mark.
But that's just me...your results with others may vary. ;-)
