Can on a Ledge

[gahspidy]

Saw this sight on one of my recent shoots. Why did I shoot this. . .I liked it! lol

what do you think?
thanks

[F-15_Flyer]

nice composition. like the natural framing, and the branches against the blown sky.

[Overbeyond]

This is working fine and I actually like the centreground fading back into thewhiteness of the background without real burnout. I think also that this might actually work equally well without the can. I feel, Gary, that the looped piece of bramble in the top right is a bit of a distraction (just the wrong shape).
I like the residue of colour left on the old bricks inside the opening. Being a city man you often come up with great locations like this. Is it far out?

[Ptax]

I like the parallel lines with the can and chimney. I am also drawn to the window that allows the viewer to see through the building to the other side.


"I find the blend of technique and creativity fascinating, sometimes frustrating, other times rewarding but always very therapeutic."
- Thomas Folke Andersen

[jgredline]

Note: Speaking to myself...''Now why Can't I come up with something so simple as this?''

Gary...This is a nice image...Even the dark shadow underneath that can looks good...
That Rusty old can combined with that abandoned beat up house sets the context of the situation nicely...

[Greg McCary]

I don't know if this quailifies as a can scape but it is still a great shot. The old chimney in the background, the slight color bleeding through the ledge and even the top missing off of the can. Nice work Gary.

[gahspidy]

Thanks for the comments,
F-15 Flyer. . .you touch on a couple of things that I wanted to point out with this image. Framing and blown out sky, thanks for your observations

Tom . . .I too think it could work without the can because the can here really is not the subject imo. It does set up and support the vertical chimmney though and adds a contrasting vertical pointing the eye up into the blown out areas. I agree about the looped branch. . .did not like it but had not clippers with me. just dynamite and plutonium

Ptax. . .ah, those are the things that I was drawn to. thanks for your time.

Javier . . I have realized over time that the simplest things are sometimes the more powerful and intriguing. I still have to remind myself that less is more evrerytime I shoot because I have a tendancy to want to include everything. thanks

Greg. . .funny you mentioned the Canscape series. I did not think about it until I started editing and then put that notion away because unlike my Canscape series, this can is not really the subject. thanks

A couple of things here for thought . . .
I have always said that blown out skies are not neccesarily a bad thing. In this case I liked the effect it had on the scene and even went so far as to wash it out further in editing.
I am curious as to what everyone feels is the subject here. We usually find the subject to be that which is in focus and usually near the fg area. In this photo I imagine many would immediately answer that the can and ledge are the subject, and that would not be wrong (it is subjective here) but for me the subject was and is the abandoned house in the bg.
The can and ledge set up the framing as well as the bramble of vines. The focus on the ledge and can, with its texture and such is merely eye candy in the scene but the real subject, for me, was and is the bg
How do you feel about that? Just curious . . .

[Greg McCary]

Well I thought it was a Canscape to start with and the a From Within picture as I looked at it longer. I realized the can wasn't in the same catagory as your others. I agree sometimes a blown out sky doesn't hurt as long as it doesn't dominate the scene. I use to think the other way about blown out skies but feel you can get away with it better with a B&W shot. Now that I have been shooting and developing more B&W film I think it's much easier to blow a sky out than with color. Or maybe it's just me. Anyway Gary it's a great shot.

[PrevailingConditions]

Gary,

I like the shot too, but I'm in the camp that wonders how the picture would look without the can. As it is, I almost feel like the can and branches are blocking the path to the cabin in the background. It's not a bad thing and sets a nice mood, but I'm not sure the can really helps.

PC

[AgingEyes]

The can and ledge set up the framing as well as the bramble of vines. The focus on the ledge and can, with its texture and such is merely eye candy in the scene but the real subject, for me, was and is the bg
How do you feel about that? Just curious . . .

If the subject is the background, then I would put the can and ledge closer to the frame, darken or de-saturate them.

[gahspidy]

If the subject is the background, then I would put the can and ledge closer to the frame, darken or de-saturate them.

AE, it really was not a matter of "If" the bg is the subject. It could be either or and that is only what I am curious to know what others feel about that. So, I take it for you the subject would be the Can and ledge?
The title implies that it is, as does the focus on them. However, I feel for me the fg merely helps frame what I find to be the most interesting area of the image,the bg, and also the area that ultimately keeps my attention.
I think moving the ledge and can closer to the frame loses the balance of composition that this has. It's like your saying that if I felt the bg was the subject, why not just have framed it alone. I do not feel the bg is as interesting without the context that the can and ledge bring to it.
I like the discussion, though and thanks for replying.

PC, I agree the image can do with or without the can, but it was there and I do feel the vertical of the can works with the vertical chimmney in the bg. I appreciate your observations.

Greg, I know what you mean about wash out and b&w film. It seems to allow for it more, and I think Tuna made a good point in one of his threads when asked in that the film has a better tonal range and will work more effectively for him in the higher contrasty situations.
thanks

[jgredline]

Hmm, as I see it and going back to the OP and title '' Can on a Ledge''; When I first clicked on that is what I expected to see, so the context was laid out in the title. The old house is an added bonus to the overall image...Had it simply been a can on the ledge with out the old house, I doubt this thread would have had these many different opinions and comments...The picture did its job, at least for me. It is telling a story...or at least making me wonder.
Why is the house abandoned? Must have been abandoned for quite some time judging by how rusted the can is..There are no windows and the grass is over grown..Now it's snowing yet there is no snow on the can or ledge. The house likely got abandoned during summer and we are now heading towards winter...

Had it been titled say ''a house'', Then I would agree the can has to go...Instead the house is a really interesting ''prop'' to the old can that tells a story...

Of course this is my opinion only...

[AgingEyes]

AE, it really was not a matter of "If" the bg is the subject. It could be either or and that is only what I am curious to know what others feel about that. So, I take it for you the subject would be the Can and ledge?

Actually, I thought you wanted to have the background as the center of interest of the photo even though you show it in sort of an unusual way in the photo.

I think moving the ledge and can closer to the frame loses the balance of composition that this has. It's like your saying that if I felt the bg was the subject, why not just have framed it alone. I do not feel the bg is as interesting without the context that the can and ledge bring to it.

The reason I think having the can and ledge closer to the frame would help because it would de-emphasize them a bit more.

[GB1]

Gary - I like most everything about the shot. It has a way of reminding me of my childhood and our exploring days while going through the woods around my home. Exposure, composition, sharpness, .. all is good. The only thing I wish was stronger was the overall subject, which while it looks good for what you had still cries out for more. What though, I don't know.

G

[gahspidy]

AE, thanks for clarifying some of the points
GB, yes I felt like a kid again rummaging around this place. Thanks for commenting