Putting a title to something is not easy, I would say that it is quite a big responsibility, of course, if the one who made the photo and put his foot is two different people. Photo feet do it, put the title, the words or a code into the photograph they have on their head, frame it conceptually. In fact, I should add what is not possible for it to appear visually in the photo; the data, the place, the names… but that small space embraces the beliefs that have irrationally come to the first sight, somehow tutorializing the current feelings.

Photography by a photographer somewhere in the world has come into the hands of an agency, editor or journalist, naked, naked, alone with his visual language, without feet. Or he has sent a foot and an explanation, but those in the drafting seats have been given enough attention.

How do you use the immense power a photograph can have? What's going to be the title of the giant photo that goes to the cover?

The fake, ambiguous, and true half foot turns the picture also into false, because in the end, the viewer's perception is false because of those little letters. The shoe is a small print, but it can change to 100% what you saw with your eyes and recorded with the camera at that time. The photographer has been the only witness… what matters, therefore, if we give viewers a dramatism and an “extra” added spectacle, nobody will notice it, only the one who signed the photo. Only the only witnesses who have been there.

Susan Sontag wrote:

“All photographs await explanation or counterfeiting according to what they have written on the foot”

“Changing the foot and (conflict in photos) dead children can be used over and over”

*The information at the bottom of the photo is false