"gonzo" <rgo### [at] lansetcom> wrote in message 
news:42eecbe7$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>> Does an image *need* a 'meaningful' title so that the viewer understands 
>> more readily what is going on?
>>
>>  I understand that some images may be obvious, but what if they're not to 
>> the viewer?
>>
>> I'm having problems at the moment with what to name some of my 
>> <hopefully!> minimalism images, (about five of them).


> After looking up a lot of the minimalist artists and their works I'm 
> beginning to think minimalism means not having anything going on.  Very 
> basic nothings seems to be the key.
>
> Maybe a series... nothing #1, nothing #2 etc...

    Yeah, thanks Ron, I see where this is heading for me and your suggestion 
seems reasonable, although, I have different subjects for each image.

     I dunno, I'll have a think about it.

     ~Steve~



>
> RG
>

Post a reply to this message