Subscribe by email
Subscribe by RSS feed
PCITW Technique: Put Crap In The Way
April 1st, 2009
That’s the actual technical term, or it’s what I call it anyways. More and more I’m engaging in this kind of framing. I’m just that kind of guy. What can I say, sometimes I run with scissors too. Increasingly I go out of my way to Put Crap In The Way (PCITW) while other, more responsible, photographers are busy doing the mirror-opposite, Taking Crap Out of The Way (TCOOTW).
Before you write me off as some lunatic fringe of the photography world (again), hear me out. I do this for two reasons. But first let me explain the technique.
First you take a simple composition, then you, uh, put crap in the way. You move until you get a strong, usually OOF (out of focus) foreground that partly obscures your main subject matter. Or you wait until someone or something moves into your framing. Option 2 is less predictable. Take the image above as an example. I have other portraits of this man, a tea house owner in Cairo, that are more traditional. He’s the foreground, his shop is the background. Nothing wrong with them, except that I have harddrives full of these shots. Five minutes later, once he’s gone back to ignoring me, I shot him from another angle, one that gave me a little junk to put between my lens (in this case an 85/1.2 wide open) and him. Much more interest than the portraits I shot. Anyways, that the simplified How-To, it’s not complicated; I’m a simple man. So here’s the Why-To.
Reason One. My compositions tend to be pretty simple, and clean. This is my rut. Nothing wrong with that, per se, but I’m engaging in intentional rut-out-getting behaviour. I think you’ll agree, it’s not terribly radical. In fact I think my compositions still need further complications. I’m a work in progress. That’s Reason One, Reason Two is better.
Reason Two. PCITW does more than complicate my compositions. It gives the images a sense of depth and that sense of depth gives the viewer a greater sense of being there. Like the use of wide angle lenses pulls the viewer into a scene, PCITW does the same thing through a similar visual means. It creates a stronger sense of foreground, midground and background, than a longer lens and a simpler composition might normally do. A viewer who feels more engaged by an image has a greater chance of responding to it in a deeper way. So that’s why the recently more intentional effort to PCITW.
Are you a TCOOTW-type of person or a PCITW-type person? Try the other shoe on a while, add to your visual repertoire of tools, jump the rut. Give it a try. The PCITW technique is growing on me.
I’m a little of both, but I am preferring the PCITW method. I think they are more interesting shots, although my shots aren’t portraits. It still counts, though, right?
best advice ever… period. or at least the best acronym ever. haha i think the seriousness of vision week got to you. well done! haha
i second the nomination for best acronym ever
Finally! A moniker for that technique! haha
I guess I would be someone who tries a bit from both worlds. I enjoy the Zen minimalist effect of the TCOOTW, yet find sometimes that shooting fast and furious for press shoots sometimes necessitates PCITW.
In that second pic, the planes are so compressed that it looks like the foreground guy wants to eat Mr. Smiling Smoker. hehe
I really like the sense of depth you get using the PCITW technique. Thanks for going into the whys.
I’m afraid I often use a variation of this technique PCRIFOYMS (put crap right in front of your main subject). Sigh.
Well, I love the idea of ignorng the conventional wisdom. And I think “Reason Two” is inspired. Seems like the effectiveness of the technique would depend on two things: what you choose for the “C” and where you place the C in the frame (ie, good old composition). The concept/technique is certainly worth experimenting with. Joey Reiman will be proud of you, David. Finally, FWIW, I think your first photo is more effective than the second; the 2nd man in the second photo is too recognizable. I found my eye went first to the man in focus but then it lingered a bit on the out of focus fellow (or OOFF), perhaps trying to understand why he was in the frame. Also, the composition of the first photo makes it appear the man is looking out from behind the C, adding even more depth to it (I think). Nice post, D.
It’s become such a cliche in snowboard photography to include part of a tree in the foreground that it has come to be known as “art branch”, as in “Well, dude’s style is pretty wack, but it’s huge, and with the art branch it’s still an ok photo.”
Dano – I love that – the art branch! Funny thing about a good technique – with overuse it becomes a distraction and actually pushes the viewer out of the image rather than pulling them in.
Thankfully the “art branch” phase has mostly passed, now we’re into the “overstrobe” phase!
Magnum photographer Alex Webb is a master at this. Check out his book “Crossings – photographs from the US Mexico border”.
Tim – Oh sure, throw a Magnum shooter in my face! Yeah, ok, he’s a master BUT does he call it PCITW? My name for it is WAY catchier than Webb’s I bet.
probably can’t juggle either.
For me, it’s a two step process: TCOOTW to get the image focus where I want it (what story do I want tell or point I want to make), then PCITW to guide the viewer’s eyes to the image focus. It’s a “vision” thing, again! Think how many images you’ve seen that are really just backgrounds–essentially 2D–then consider how they’d be improved if there was something else in them to make them 3D. PCITW adds a richness to many images…IMHO.
[...] is that you say? You are probably doing alread. David duChemin posts about his new acronym’s here. Put Crap In The Way, and Take Crap Out Of The Way. (t.coot.wa [...]
I’ve always hated the nothing-out-of-focus in the foreground mantra. So, I’m PCITW and proud!
UEUWCITW – Unintentionally Ending-Up With Crap In The Way. Composition has been something I’ve desperately been working on for a few years now – and I’m often missing those fine details that can make or ruin a photo – unintentionally when they’re making it – but I’ll certainly take credit for it being there.
This actually reminds me of one of my earliest posts where it’s framed really well (IMHO) but honestly, I just took the shot: http://jvl.stasis.org/pixelpost/index.php?showimage=293
Yep have to say over the last year or so PCITW has been part of my workflow.
Thanks for your comments about the Northwest Passage and putting crap in the way! I like that! As a journalist, I need to tell a story, to give context and a place. I am glad someone understands.
I am enjoying your own work very much.
I think the compositional term would be ‘layering’ . There’s always this drive to simplify, simplify, simplify compositions. Keep things clean, get rid of ‘distractions’ (the worst word in the photo commenting world I think – can we ban it?)
Layers add depth, complexity, crap in the way, before and after the subject.