Information or Experience in extended captions ?

[QT Luong]

I've been asked to provide extended caption for an exhibit of National Parks photos.

I've written one set that describe the park, and one set that emphasizes my experience.

See a few here http://www.terragalleria.com/social/np-captions.html

Which ones do you prefer ?

[Heroique]

I think your personal experiences in Caption B are far more engaging than the impersonal descriptions in Caption A.

But each type of caption, I think, serves an important role for the viewer.

For example, your beautiful, snow-sprinkled shot of Delicate Arch looks cold – but what makes it “feel” even colder is your personal experience in Caption B: “My car battery had died, but my expedition-grade sleeping bag kept me warm for the night.”

It might take some clever editing, but integrating the two would be worth the challenge.

[Matt Ellison]

I always look for the scientific/technical data (mostly like the 'A' captions), but in this context I enjoy the more personal captions (B). Perhaps, you could try to combine them.

[Renato Tonelli]

I always look for the scientific/technical data (mostly like the 'A' captions), but in this context I enjoy the more personal captions (B). Perhaps, you could try to combine them.

I totally agree with this statement as well as the suggestion to combine the captions. If this is not possible or desirable, I would prefer the "A" caption.

[David Karp]

I guess it depends on the purpose for which the photos will be used.

Are the photos worth more for stock purposes if they have a caption? If yes, probably the A type of caption would be useful.

Is the exhibition a solo exhibition? If yes, then I would combine the two types. Although the artwork speaks for itself, I always enjoy learning a bit more about the artist's experience or feelings while making the piece. AA was very good at this, and I think that the extra information adds to the overall experience for the viewer.

If the exhibition is not solo, and you have the option, I would still go for a combination. I suppose they might want more uniformity, and if that is the case, A would be more the standard.

[Heroique]

BTW, I think this question is quite unique to the LF forum, and helpful for exhibition-makers and photo viewers alike.

David’s observation that “the artwork speaks for itself” wins a lot of sympathy from me, and suggests one more option: Why not forego the captions altogether?

(I see you’ve been asked for them, so this may not be an option.)

In any case, many viewers of superior photography must share my dissatisfaction when placards and explanations “get in the way.” Some argue they always get in the way. “Art means itself” is the justification. But of course, whether or not to include captions depends on many factors, such as coordinating your individual aims with a firm understanding of the audience. And in this show, perhaps your audience would at least want to know which park they're looking at; maybe an optional handout would work.

I’ve also seen effective landscape exhibitions with Spartan captions: Park name, date.

[Peter York]

I think A and B should be merged, perhaps with a more spartan edit of A. I think that the story behind the photograph, or art in general, is illuminating, captivating, and complementary. I have learned this lesson many times - Mark Rothko and Galen Rowell immediately come to mind.

Peter

[Dan Fromm]

QT, in general "A", but for the third shot "A" and "B" edited to "A: Entrada and Navajo sandstone has been sculpted by erosion into a whimsical rock garden that includes the largest collection of natural arches on earth, as well as windows, pinnacles, spires, fins, balanced rocks, and pedestals. What distinguishes Delicate Arch, chosen by the state of Utah to be its symbol, among the more than two thousand arches in the park is its graceful shape and location above a curving slickrock basin with the La Sal Mountains as a backdrop."

In other words, tell us about the site, not about yourself and your feelings.

[QT Luong]

Thanks for the comments. I've moved the thread out of the Lounge per request.

I used A in an exhibit before, but I then I had a second thought about those reinforcing the notion that the exhibit is less about the art and more about the parks. In talking with viewers during openings, I've also noticed that they are interested in knowing the story behind images.

I should probably have added an option "A+B", but the software doesn't let me add options to an existing poll.

[iamjanco]

Hi QT,

One thing that none of the others have mentioned yet that I figured I better mention: always spell check any text you're going to display. I'm an Information Architect by trade, and immediately spotted at least one spelling error in your poll. You may already run spell such spell checks when you're getting ready to post final copy, but of course, I wouldn't know.

In response to your original question, my preference is a combination of A+B. A provides details, while B provides context. I tend to think of context being important in instances like these, as it helps the viewer see what you saw.

Hope that helps,

Jan C.

[GPS]

Nothing is worse for a viewer than personal artificially hyped blah-blah trying to steer the viewer to "feelings" about a picture.
Cold, matter of factly given description leaves wonderful space for ones own imagination when viewing pictures completing the facts with a content from inside.
Take as an example the image of the day on the Nasa Earth observatory site (google out)!

[Richard Raymond]

Mr. Luong,
My assumption is that this is a business problem for you, not a technical photography issue. This is an opportunity for you to expand on your recent name exposure provided by the Ken Burns documentary and thereby increase sales of prints, stock usage and ancillary items. The target audience is not photographers but the general public and secondly galleries. The larger the general audience and the better their response, the more galleries will want to exhibit your work. The bigger the general buzz the greater the increase in stock requests and book deals.
Therefore write the captions for a general, non-photographer audience. Think of this as a story layout in National Geographic or for those old enough Life Magazine. Answer the basic questions of who, what, why and how for the photo with a touch of personal experience. This experience will also provide some insight into what it takes to be a photographer. Don't dwell on issues of composition or photo technique. Use the captions to tell a story that will have bits of information that the gallery goers can talk about at their next party.
Remember, this is not about photography. It is about business.
Ric

[J Ney]

QT, in general "A", but for the third shot "A" and "B" edited to "A: Entrada and Navajo sandstone has been sculpted by erosion into a whimsical rock garden that includes the largest collection of natural arches on earth, as well as windows, pinnacles, spires, fins, balanced rocks, and pedestals. What distinguishes Delicate Arch, chosen by the state of Utah to be its symbol, among the more than two thousand arches in the park is its graceful shape and location above a curving slickrock basin with the La Sal Mountains as a backdrop."

In other words, tell us about the site, not about yourself and your feelings.

I second this... I come from a science background so I always find it best to remove any reference to the author or (in this case) photographer. The descriptions in part B are very valuable and help the viewer "feel" the image more, but I think it would be best avoid mentioning yourself in the caption and - if you do - to write it in the 3rd person.

[Drew Wiley]

I suspect the general public will lose interest trying to read long descriptions. After all,
the main point is the image itself! And most of them aren't interested in a lot of photo
how-to points. I've seen some otherwise excellent location-oriented coffee table books
spoiled by way too much nuts and bolts data. I also disdain the habit of pointing out
exactly where certain images were taken, especially if it is a spot with fragile ecology.
Herds of photographers can be worse than a bulldozer over time. I've certainly seen my
share of pristine places get ruined once a specific shot became widely published with
too much location detail. Think we need to be responsible to the land in this aspect too.

[tgtaylor]

The title and date (e.g., "Otter Point, Acadia National Park, Maine - Oct 1997") and B -with serious rewriting of the latter: Not too syrupy and not too matter of fact, just interesting.

[Gem Singer]

"A" for a portfolio.

"B" for an exhibit.

The photos will be used for an exhibit. Use the "B" type captions.

[r.e.]

Major art museums, in conjunction with featured/major exhibits, routinely have extended descriptions of the artist and the individual works. The descriptions may include contextual or technical information or both. I'd like to suggest that you go to such a museum where you live and see how it is done. The descriptions are more objective and more informative than your drafts, and the sentences are shorter. There is perhaps something to be said for getting someone else to write these, based on discussion with you, or at least for getting someone else edit what you write. I think that the problem starts with calling these "captions". In other words, if I were a friend of yours, I'd tell you to deep-six both A and B and go back to the drawing board.