Magazine Captions

[2ManySpams]

It is a very sad state of affairs that the reader of a caption canot always believe what he reads. There really is no excuse for some of the blunders that make it into print. Some recent issues of Hornby Magazine are blessed with particularly silly errors which can only devalue the product.

 

Funny you should say this. I wrote and carefully checked the content of an article a while back for the very same mag. It got 'Edited' and in doing so changed the intended meaning and made it factually incorrect. I got it in the neck from 'knowledgeable others' as the article carried my name and folk assumed it was my own mistake. I spotted the error as soon as the mag came out, sent a 'Dear sir' corrective note in to put matters right but this never got published. Some folk will now believe that rebuilt Spams were ok to Padstow...

 

These days there's a big push to publish lots with very little time for proper checking or sending a proof back to the author. I did have plans to write a load more for that mag but felt i was wasting my time and it was just a page filling exercise. Pity, because I'm sure that given enough time and resources Mike could do an absolutely fantastic job.

[2ManySpams]

That's the point. It takes time to get things right, but if you are asking people to pay for your work, you must spend the necessary time to get it right. It may not be possible to be 100% accurate, but I object to paying a lot of money for books and magazines only to find that they give the impression of having been put together in a hurry.

 

Geoff Endacott

 

Quite right Geoff, there's a book i bought a few years back that I'd been really looking forward too. Flicked through it on the book stall and thought, 'great, there's loads of new pictures'. Got it home, started reading the text and accompanying text, and was appalled by the many errors, half-truths and obvious guesses there were in the captions and core text. Wrote a review on here, saying 'loved the photos but treat the text with caution', and got the author's friends sending me very defensive mail and claiming I was being very unfair to the poor old author. I was asked to put up or shut up and in response sent a long list of the errors I'd spotted from just a few pages and got yet more grief (PMs and other routes). Needless to say I've steered clear of the same authors books - I've also stopped writing reviews because people appear disinterested in getting it right.

 

What does concern me though, is that when those with living memory of a subject have gone, these books will be treated as gospel by future generations. It's no wonder history gets perverted! Anyway, I now treat many new books as comics and just look at the pictures...and that's if the printing quality is good enough (don't start me on that one).

[2ManySpams]

Mmmm, two moans in quick succession - obviously the thread has hit a nerve! I'll shut up now.

[2ManySpams]

No dont. Its true what you say!

I tend to believe captions to photographs, especially if it is a subject I know little about (which is rather common!).....But when I see a caption that i know is wrong it makes me wonder how many others are "not quite as correct as they should be"......

 

Exactly.

[Kenton]

These days there's a big push to publish lots with very little time for proper checking

 

As the BBC have learnt recently to their cost.

 

Good captioning is not just a problem for the magazines and books - these days the internet is full of it - sometimes I think not always the fault of the author, who may not have taken the photo, or may not have made detailed notes at the time, or may not have had the supporting knowledge then or now. Additional research many years after the original snap takes not only an excellent understanding of the subject bit also the time to devote to critical research of all the available, and often conflicting, material already published (including other photos with poor captioning).

 

In the end which would we prefer a photo that is published with a caption or a photo with no caption or some rule that imposes a caption or no photo at all?

[The Stationmaster]

As the BBC have learnt recently to their cost.

 

Good captioning is not just a problem for the magazines and books - these days the internet is full of it - sometimes I think not always the fault of the author, who may not have taken the photo, or may not have made detailed notes at the time, or may not have had the supporting knowledge then or now. Additional research many years after the original snap takes not only an excellent understanding of the subject bit also the time to devote to critical research of all the available, and often conflicting, material already published (including other photos with poor captioning).

 

In the end which would we prefer a photo that is published with a caption or a photo with no caption or some rule that imposes a caption or no photo at all?

I think it might sometimes be better to be honest and admit, in as helpful away as possible of course - that some details are not known 'or could not be confirmed before going to press'

[Kenton]

I think it might sometimes be better to be honest and admit, in as helpful away as possible of course - that some details are not known 'or could not be confirmed before going to press'

 

That is spot on. Just adding that bit of uncertainty rather than making it appear definitive when it really is just a guess (even an educated one).

[kevinlms]

That is spot on. Just adding that bit of uncertainty rather than making it appear definitive when it really is just a guess (even an educated one).

 

At least with a web site on the internet, its possible to have a site for any publication, where updated information can be added. No different to the 'Where am I' type of photo to be found in many threads.

 

Always assuming the author/publisher is prepared to set up a site AND that they are prepared to accept that they may be wrong.

[Kenton]

Always assuming the author/publisher is prepared to set up a site AND that they are prepared to accept that they may be wrong.

 

It is not just about accepting that they may be wrong. So often the suggested "correction" comes with little or no more credence than the original caption. Often just one persons lucid memory versus another's with no reference support material. Sometimes such information is even worse as it can get amalgamated with other strongly referenced material and end up with the whole being discredited or suspect.

[The Stationmaster]

It is not just about accepting that they may be wrong. So often the suggested "correction" comes with little or no more credence than the original caption. Often just one persons lucid memory versus another's with no reference support material. Sometimes such information is even worse as it can get amalgamated with other strongly referenced material and end up with the whole being discredited or suspect.

Which makes things even worse leading to confusion and, in the end, total inability for the reader to value which one of several opinions (or, often, 'absolute certainties') is right and giving it all up as a bad job. And making things far worse than they were with just the original error.

[kevinlms]

Which makes things even worse leading to confusion and, in the end, total inability for the reader to value which one of several opinions (or, often, 'absolute certainties') is right and giving it all up as a bad job. And making things far worse than they were with just the original error.

 

Undoubtably you're correct, but what is the solution? I suppose on the net, its feasible to analyse a photo by a group of people & pick the best answer. The question is who judges it?

 

On the LMSreg yahoo group, there is a discussion regarding the arrival of A3 60113 at St Pancras near the end of steam. A view was that a mistake was made by someone assuming - misheard probably, that 46113 (a Royal Scot) was attached to the front. So if professionals couldn't get it right on the day, what hope amateurs (or professionals for that matter) several decades later?

 

Many locations are well known and there is little doubt as to its location (examples such as Euston, old Birmingham New Street or Kentish Town loco shed), but what about more obscure locations?

 

I reckon worse than an incorrectly identified caption, is one where the photo is hidden away, because no one knows for sure where it is, or at least the owner doesn't, so never sees the light of day.

[Kenton]

I reckon worse than an incorrectly identified caption, is one where the photo is hidden away, because no one knows for sure where it is, or at least the owner doesn't, so never sees the light of day.

 

Oh, I certainly agree with that. Just how many photographs have been lost or discarded simply because the owner/inheritor has no idea of their worth or intellectual value. One of the biggest issues with Historical record is that if no one makes a careful and evidential record at the time it is lost to history or at least to the whims of "historical" discussion groups with little more value than current opinion or "fashionable" thought ... and I don't only refer to railway history.

 

I would always prefer some guess on a caption than none at all - but it would also be much better to see some indication of the quality of the "guess" or the only fact is that is simply the author's/editor's educated opinion/take on history.

[Xerces Fobe2]

I have just taken over 2000 photos in the last couple of weeks; will I remember all the details relating to then in a couple of years time to the detail I currently do? Maybe comsider adding "From what I recall this is" or similar to a caption of a photo where there is some doubt about the content could be a potential solution?

 

XF

[DaveF]

As some of you know I have several thousand railway images on flickr, taken by Dad and myself. Despite making notes as we took the photos, or later that day, errors still occur in my captions - fortunately other enthusiasts are often kind enough to point them out - but sometimes I am right and they are wrong.

 

It is also very easy to mistype when captioning, especially when typing dates.

 

To be honest with over 40,000 railway images up to 2003 and countless thousand digital ones since then there are bound to be some errors in my notes.

 

As for what happens when someone dies - it is easy to give a trusted friend (preferably someone younger) a hard drive with a copy of the images, the harder bit in my case is making sure they also get the 80+ books and several box files of notes about the images.

 

I always keep back ups of the captioned images uploaded so that someone else could upload them again after I am gone.

 

David

 

Edited to correct the (usual) typing error.

[2ManySpams]

One of the BCB team OldGringo (John) volunteers most Thursdays to spend the day in the SVR museum at Kidderminster. His job?. To work through the piles of historical photos with others to try and identify date, location and subject content. Far from easy and there are lots that will probably never be tied down now. If this is something you do regularly though, you do tend to get your eye in on locations and content. Not something learnt overnight though.