At first, I didn't give names to my pictures. Then I needed to do that because this was a part of the standard application for contests and grants. And then I realized one thing: the title is not just a way to summarize briefly and convey to the viewer the essence of your work. On the one hand, it is also an opportunity to see more. On the other hand, it is a powerful tool of influence. When you have only an image, you interact with the viewer only visually. When a name is added, new communication channels appear. The first channel is the auditory one. Sounds - solid, soft, hissing, iridescent and repetitive - can resonate with the image, evoke emotions and even visual representations (for example, color). The second channel is connected with the meaning of the word, its consonance and proximity to something else that can turn into a funny game. The association can highlight an entire big idea in the image.
Read a post of London-based Russian photographer Anna Radchenko about good taste in art. Read again and again. Did it hook me? Yes. Did it cause outrage and protest? Also yes. As if there is a certain destination point, "good taste", which must be achieved at all costs. In the end - reach, develop, get, and - what? Stop or move further to "even better taste"? I think that there is only one thing - development - a movement that does not and cannot have any end point. Each individual will have a trajectory of his/her movement determined by a combination of a huge number of factors (education, market situation, internal passions, and so on). Our creative trajectories come together or intersect - we understand and support each other; diverge too far - we look at each other and say, "Dude, you are doing complete crap." And then, we go our separate ways.