The first thing that stuck out to me was the framing. The window frame provided a very nice and natural frame for the city view. Metaphorically, it also acted as a frame for the city. The physical frame was old and rusting, and that gave an accurate context of the city itself.
The next thing that stuck out to me was the depth. I love depth :). It looks really cool. I usually am pretty ambivalent when it comes to different buildings and stuff having a “nice view”. The exception is when it’s a view that provides a lot of depth. I love looking out from the top of the cathedral, and I enjoy a lot of other views in Pittsburgh that provide such depth.
This picture has some solid depth. I’d divide it into 3 categories: the room/window, the city in front of us, and the little bit of city we see behind the city in front of us. The room/window area gives us a nice perspective when looking out into the city. The city in the far background also gives us some context as to where the city in front of us sits. However, I would have liked it if the city in the background played a larger role in the photo. It’s really just a tiny fraction following the main road.
On that note, that main street provides a really nice leading line. It guides us from the near city to the city in the background pretty well.
Fitting into the Whole
I’m actually confused as to how this fits into the rest of the photo essay. I would say that this picture is sorta “nice”. The city looks clean, well-kept, there’s people walking around etc. The picture is at the beginning, so maybe it’s purpose is to remind the viewer what Detroit once was. Still, that doesn’t explain the framing of the rusty window.
This picture doesn’t really make me feel anything. When I look at it, I just see a normal city with normal activity. It’s sorta cool to look out into the depth, but the depth is a tiny portion of the picture as a whole. It’s also sorta cool looking out of the rusty window frame, but not cool enough for it to have an effect on me.
– Adam Zerner