I’ve shot a lot of environmental portraits lately and one thing I’ve never really understood is if it’s okay to move things around to get a better shot.
For example, I took the above photo during a shoot for the Statesman a few weeks ago. The lady in the photo is Jane Rogers and she’s had both hips replaced more than once due to a recall of hip implant components. She’s doing much better now and is able to walk without any aid.
When I got to her home, I looked for 2 things – the best lighting and either crutches or a walker or something that I could use to better tell her story in one shot. I saw a pair of crutches leaning against the wall near the front door and fortunately, the couch near there had pretty good lighting. So I had her sit on the couch and I took a shot with the crutches where they stood.
With the exception of telling Ms. Rogers where to sit, I didn’t move anything in the photo.
So here’s where my dilemma comes in. In photojournalism school we’re taught not to move anything (other than ourselves) or direct anyone to make a better shot. But how does that apply with portraits?
I would have liked the crutches to be a little more prominent and the bright light coming in from the front door to be removed (or at least not in the center of my shot), but without moving the crutches, how would I do that?
I guess I’ve tried both methods – moving things around and keeping everything as is – but I never really know what the correct answer is. Please comment with any thoughts.
2 Comments