Well, about the title: ipernity has a bug at this point (reported in ticket #23883, but they can´t reproduce it, not even with a given example-file by me, so this ticket ended in "Not resolved") which prevent the displaying of the given title (in IPTC - tags) as title for ipernity. Instead the filename is chosen... I add a title and even a description to nearly every upload, but expecially at larger batches it could be annoying to replace each title after uploading (even in organizer) because of this bug.
So this might be the reason for some of these filenames in titles (of course, I suggest, this was the minority, mostly the title wasn´t set in exif or iptc).

About geotagging: Well, most of my photos are geotagged as well. Just a few ones imported from flickr aren´t, or if I don´t want to provide geo-infos because of security-reasons (some family-photos etc.). Also I add a link to WikiPedia if it´s a place of interest.

But all these needs time... So if you are talking about missing titles and geolocations I could talk about you and missing keywords - where are your keywords for this article? ;-)

Not everyone will invest this time. Which is sometimes sad, yes. And I wonder why they don´t provide this information, why they don´t tag their documents with keywords - they will help everyone to find their docs, even by the photographer itself. But I won´t interpret this as not being polite - sometimes it´s because of a lack of time, sometimes because of a bug, sometimes - well, many more reasons why somebody don´t title the documents, why not provide some background - information about it - or why somebody don´t provide some keywords...

Well, if I´m searching for informations where a photo was taken - mostly I post it to a group of this area and ask in title for the location, this will help mostly if it wasn´t to specific.

About your feauture - suggestion: Well, there are groups for this. Mostly they are, of course, local ones. And some of them are in "different direction" - the photograph will known the location, but others should find it... these kind of groups are named "Guess where [city]" - groups... sadly most of them are in deep, deep sleeping-mode.

Thanks for your comment, which is really appreciated since I'm still working to understand the ins and outs of Ipernity. And yes, you are right, where are my keywords? To be honest: I'm working on it! And agan, you are right here as well, it takes some effort and time.

And as to the question of titles: For me the vast majority of photos without titles or explanation simply don't get my attention. Only very few photos really speak for themselves and don't need any explanation. But I've seen galleries here only with boring titles as DSC_XXX from end to end. Great vintage cars, a gallery full of airplanes and other marvels, which caught my interest immediately, however, neither titles nor explanations ... so what, I just turn around and go away. (btw: the automatic use of the IPTC information is nice feature, I haven't thought about that. But I have to admit, that I don't use that feature myself)

I really enjoy galleries, which come with lots of background information and have started to augment my photos accordingly. I love to read the stories e.g. the almost incredible story of the refurbishment of your house and appartment.

Now, let me get to work on my keywords ;-)

Greetings to my hometown, Lutz

Just saw this... I agree that its frustrating to see a fascinating building or landscape and there be nothing in the title or keywords that give you any knowledge of where it is.

Regarding suggesting corrections for places on geo-tagging, I've mixed feelings on that. I appreciate it when someone does say something helpful, but I've photos on Panoramio and too often the changes are incorrectly to the location that is being photographed (e.g., Alcatraz Island), not the location from which the photo was taken (e.g., the waterfront in SF). I'm also frustrated by all of the photos that are geo-tagged only by some major point (e.g., whatever point Google gives when you type in "San Francisco") that's way too crude for telling the viewer where it was taken.

Yes Don, I agree to some extent. Geo-tagging comes in different flavors ;-). And I have to admit, that I really enjoy to precisely position my photos even those which have been taken 40 years ago. I know, that I cannot expect that from everybody else. On Panoramio you have the option to correct misplaced photos, which I usually do, if I stumble over one, where I know the place. Thanks for stopping by and greetings, Lutz

I also often get pages, on which I find beautiful photos of interesting and exciting landscapes.
It is always again so bad to find no word of description and no title and no location.
I often wonder why a photo in this manner at all has been uploaded.

...see, you never walk alone, not even here ;-)

What I like most about ipernity is that most of the submissions are from Europe. My wife and I have had the good fortune to have made several trips to Europe in the last few years. When I see your beautiful part of the world, well captured, yes I want to know where it is. We have started to plan our trips, in a general sense, from member's photos.

I think, that is a very nice "fringe benefit" of geotagged photos. I do exactly the same but also enjoy to virtually visit parts of world, where I will most likely never go.

Fotografieren heißt Ideen umsetzen.... Dinge sehen und ihnen eine Bedeutung
geben... Bilder halten Momente des "Sehens" fest ... oft sogar Emotionen.
Daher sollten sie auch einen Titel haben der diesen Moment beschreibt
oder das wiedergibt was sich der/die Fotograph/in durch den Kopf ging.

Meiner Meinung nach ist es nicht zwingend ... aber hilfreich eine
Beschreibung hinzu zu fügen... aber Bilder ohne Titel...
sind meiner Meinung nach Ideenlos und entsprechen dann nicht
der Kreativität des Urhebers.

...sehe ich genau so Katja. Ohne Titel: Mangel an Phantasie und/ oder Interessee, warum hat der Fotograf das überhaupt fotografiert, wenn er / sie es nicht benennen kann!Beschreibung: manches erschließt sich von selbst, da brauchts danna uch keine Beschreibung, oft ist die aberschon hilfreich. Ich beschäftige mich dann deutlich länger mit so einem Bild.

I fully agree! I like to see not only a title but also a description, tags and geotagging and tend to skip photos that provide nothing but IMG_123. But after all those users harm themselves because their photos can't be found on the map or by tag search.

BTW- tags are not always easy, they are case sensitive, sensitive to spelling and blanks. Try to find photos under the tag blue port- there's BluePort, blue port, blueport... always different photos. So where do you begin and end with tagging? Germany, Deutschland, Allemagne ...?

my words, I have given up on tagging for the time being. too much trouble, too prone to error, too clumsy process. But I'm impressed, when I see some guys here, who have zillions of tags on their photos!

Die Fehler kann man eigentlich ganz gut korrigieren (nach Stichworten suchen, bearbeiten) und neue Tags für viele Fotos gehen gut über den Organisator.

Recently, a number of my images uploaded without the file title. So if you upload images straight to "public viewing" they can appear without a title / description. Very annoying, for both owner and viewer.
Although I usually add keywords, I sometimes forget - or need to edit / add other tags as I go along.

Well, right after upload is not my problem, I come back later. But if the entire gallery comes along with IMG_XXX, that was my last visit then. IMHO it's a matter of respect towards the visitor.