Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
lens for real estate
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
Jan 10, 2019 12:10:58   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Sometimes we gor se involved in micromanaging the technology that we may forget what we are doing.

In real estate work we are helping brokers and agents in selling or renting properties. Obviously, we need neses that can accommodate the angles of view and the spaces we need to work in. Our clients expect sharp, clean undistorted realistic images to represent the properties. Decent modern wide angle lenses in the traditional wide angle focal length for thei formas will do the job if expertly applied.

When this topic comes up, I feel there is not enough discussion of styling, lighing and aesthetics. There are camera angles and lightg scenarios that draw the viewer into the rooms you are illustrating. There are angles and foreground framing techniques in composition that give the potental buyer or renter a feeling of being there. We sometimes have to bring out textures and accentuate certain design details. Sometimes we are confronted with very modest or somewhat lackluster interiors and exteriors and that presents some creative challenges.

The agents we are serving don't expect to sell anythg strictly on the basis of out picture. Our job, in conjunction with the advertising media, to simply get the agent's phone to ring. The first component of a sale of any kind is to attract attention, created desire and begin the process of communication. Of course, the potential buyer has much more criteria to consider than the visual attraction of the photographs- the price, the desired neighborhood and all the legal and financial issues of buying or renting a property. There are lots of ingredients- we are just providing the packaging- make it attractive!

As many have pointed out, some of theses jobs have very limited budgets and need to be done on almost a mass-production basis. There shoud be discussions of how to create good aesthetics in a limited time frame in an efficient and timely manner.

Reply
Jan 10, 2019 22:13:54   #
Bipod
 
kenArchi wrote:
Here are samples of my recent photo shoot. I use a D5500, 10-20 Sigma lens, a CPL filter, and up to 4 383 sunpac flashes in silver umbrellas.
After it is furnished I'll be going back. For a second shoot.

Most all photos are at 10mm(15mm at FF)

There are 39 photos of this project.

I'll can send 10 now, I can send more if you want.

What a beautiful house.

Those photos look surprisingly good, despite floors tilting up
and ceilings tilting down (as one would expect at 10 mm).
They really give a sense of spaciousness and light.

Impossible to look at those images and not be impressed by the property.

Reply
Jan 10, 2019 22:48:43   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
canon Lee wrote:
Hi. The agents here wont pay more than $100~150. I try to be competitive and charge $100.00. My technique does not require drones, & lighting equipment. My shoots generally take about an hour. I shoot using ambient light, which requires just the camera and tripod. I set the camera to aperture, F8, bracket 1 step, & shoot 3 shots. I am contemplating buying a Full Frame Canon 6D that has the HDR built in, which saves tons of time PP. I find that the lower priced homes demands more creativity, where the million dollar homes actually sell themselves. I actually spend less time at larger homes. Its these tiny homes that are cramped and are not furnished with expensive furniture.
Hi. The agents here wont pay more than $100~150. ... (show quote)


Most in camera hdr photos look like hdr. But my question is, why would it take you a ton of time to merge hdr in LR for example? I use LR and Affinity, both provide natural looking results and doesn’t take long at all

Reply
 
 
Jan 10, 2019 23:07:54   #
Bipod
 
Gene51 wrote:
Well, when you get to specifics and meaningful differences, a little fact checking is in order-

Here are two reviews - one of the 15-85 and another of an 85mm F1.8

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/465-canon_1585_3556is?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d?start=1

If you look at them carefully - you'll see that at 85mm, the zoom shows .32% pincushion distortion, and the prime lens .24% barrel. Neither has noticeable distortion at 85mm. So much for your expectation that the zoom lens would have "plenty" of distortion. The amounts are statistically equivalent.

Here are two reviews - 14-24 and the 20mm f1.8 prime

https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/975-nikkorafs2018ff?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/447-nikkor_afs_1424_28_ff?start=1

You'll see that the prime lens shows barrel distortion of 1.6%, and the zoom at 21mm shows only .505% barrel - which is barely noticeable.

Distortion is less of an issue today - and even a lens with horrible complex distortion, like the 14mm F2.8 Samyang/Rokinon/Bower - which has about the worst complex distortion I have ever seen in a lens that I have used - can be corrected -

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff?start=1

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57172988

Oh, and by the way, the 5.29% barrel/complex distortion in this prime lens is considerably higher than the 3.91% in the Nikon zoom. Just sayin'

I began shooting architectural work for my architecture professors in the early 70s - they needed reasonably priced work to add to their company portfolios. Later I did a bit more work for hire, and had a nice business doing work for large contractors, developers and interior designers. My camera of choice was a Sinar P 4x5 (and later a P2), and an assortment of Nikon and Rodenstock lenses to get it done. I used the large format camera for the ability to control perspective, which includes vertical and horizontal keystoning, and with the swings and tilts I had better control over depth of field. For what it's worth, the reason you don't see zoom lenses on large format cameras is that no company actually makes one.

Field curvature is a fact of life, l lenses have field curvature, btw. But it is not an insurmountable one, if you understand your gear and use it correctly. And each lens can have a variety of curvature effects, depending on subject to camera distance, aperture and focal length (if using a zoom). Your claim that if you shoot a wall with a lens that has field curvature , it will only be sharp in the center is pure ignorance. All lenses have field curvature. Clearly if you know your gear and focus carefully, you can decide to strike a happy medium when you have a lens soft corners - you re-focus to a point in between the optimum focus for the center and that for the edges - and stop down sufficiently to allow depth of field to provide a reasonably sharp image that has good sharpness across the entire field. When using a view camera it was standard practice to load a 4x5 polaroid back to check image sharpness and adjust accordingly. If you actually shot large format you'd know that.

Good article illustrating how field curvature works and why it isn't necessarily a bad thing:

https://petapixel.com/2016/12/21/field-curvature-tricky-problem-photography/

And how common it really is:

https://photographylife.com/what-is-field-curvature

Which "true" APO lenses do you own?

So much for your claim that primes are better in the distortion/curvature/aberration department than zooms. Such is not always the case, and using generalities to make a case reveals that you do a lot of keyboard surfing and have considerable googling skills, but have little practical experience.

BTW, on another note - please use a decent spell checker -

distortion not distoration
processing, not processsing
wall, not well
aberration, not aberation
least, not leaste

And on a final note, I suppose you've never heard of the the Harley LIVEWIRE™ - which is - you guessed it - an electric Harley that costs $29K.

[ur]https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/future-vehicles/livewire.html?source_cd=SEM_Retention_PPC&_cr=ppc%7cGOOGLE%7cFuture_Vehicles_Brand_B%7cElectric_Motorcycle%7c%2Belectric+%2Bharley&gclid=CjwKCAiA99vhBRBnEiwAwpk-uMWE0Aneztaln_qgsYIWgqTB-kvBGJ4TxwO-qv0CdL2BAzmla5cc4BoCdHYQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds[/url]
Well, when you get to specifics and meaningful dif... (show quote)

Quoting your first link:
The EF-S 15-85mm produces a heavy degree of barrel distortion at 15mm (3.15%).
While this may be somewhat disappointing it's simply normal for such lenses.

which was my point exactly. Thanks for the help!

You bring up the terrible 14mm F2.8 Samyang/Rokinon/Bower as a straw man, so you can shoot it down.
I didn't suggest that lens.

I never said I owned any true APO lenses. I'm aware of the limitations of the lenses that I use--
for one thing, I test them. Do you test lenes, or just believe "reviews"?

I agree totally that "field curvature is a fact of life". I should have been more clear:
for most photography it is not a problem. But "all lens have field curvature" is a sophistry:
some have a lot more than others! It can be a problem.

The wall example is relevant beause in most photography, there is a subject and a background.
Often, the background is out of focus, which is OK. But if the subject is a mural or a mosaic
that fills the frame, any defocus around the edges--such as caused by curvature of the image field
on a flat sensor--will be noticable.

Surely you don't think all enlarger lenses have a lot of field curvature? Lens designs
chose different degrees of correction for different aberations depending on the intended use.
Lens buyers should pick the best lens for job, not just some lens that happens to be convenient.

There is still one digital camera that has a curved sensor-- a Sony P&S, I think. Maybe
someone remembers which one. That's an interesting way of dealing with a curved image
space.

Thank you for admitting my points that view cameras are used for architecture and that no one
uses zoom lense with view cameras.

So if you used a Sinar then, why do you think it's OK to use a Nikon with a zoom lens now?
Is it something to do with declining standards in photography?

Reply
Jan 10, 2019 23:08:46   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
Gene51 wrote:
Well, when you get to specifics and meaningful differences, a little fact checking is in order-

Here are two reviews - one of the 15-85 and another of an 85mm F1.8

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/465-canon_1585_3556is?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d?start=1

If you look at them carefully - you'll see that at 85mm, the zoom shows .32% pincushion distortion, and the prime lens .24% barrel. Neither has noticeable distortion at 85mm. So much for your expectation that the zoom lens would have "plenty" of distortion. The amounts are statistically equivalent.

Here are two reviews - 14-24 and the 20mm f1.8 prime

https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/975-nikkorafs2018ff?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/447-nikkor_afs_1424_28_ff?start=1

You'll see that the prime lens shows barrel distortion of 1.6%, and the zoom at 21mm shows only .505% barrel - which is barely noticeable.

Distortion is less of an issue today - and even a lens with horrible complex distortion, like the 14mm F2.8 Samyang/Rokinon/Bower - which has about the worst complex distortion I have ever seen in a lens that I have used - can be corrected -

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff?start=1

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57172988

Oh, and by the way, the 5.29% barrel/complex distortion in this prime lens is considerably higher than the 3.91% in the Nikon zoom. Just sayin'

I began shooting architectural work for my architecture professors in the early 70s - they needed reasonably priced work to add to their company portfolios. Later I did a bit more work for hire, and had a nice business doing work for large contractors, developers and interior designers. My camera of choice was a Sinar P 4x5 (and later a P2), and an assortment of Nikon and Rodenstock lenses to get it done. I used the large format camera for the ability to control perspective, which includes vertical and horizontal keystoning, and with the swings and tilts I had better control over depth of field. For what it's worth, the reason you don't see zoom lenses on large format cameras is that no company actually makes one.

Field curvature is a fact of life, l lenses have field curvature, btw. But it is not an insurmountable one, if you understand your gear and use it correctly. And each lens can have a variety of curvature effects, depending on subject to camera distance, aperture and focal length (if using a zoom). Your claim that if you shoot a wall with a lens that has field curvature , it will only be sharp in the center is pure ignorance. All lenses have field curvature. Clearly if you know your gear and focus carefully, you can decide to strike a happy medium when you have a lens soft corners - you re-focus to a point in between the optimum focus for the center and that for the edges - and stop down sufficiently to allow depth of field to provide a reasonably sharp image that has good sharpness across the entire field. When using a view camera it was standard practice to load a 4x5 polaroid back to check image sharpness and adjust accordingly. If you actually shot large format you'd know that.

Good article illustrating how field curvature works and why it isn't necessarily a bad thing:

https://petapixel.com/2016/12/21/field-curvature-tricky-problem-photography/

And how common it really is:

https://photographylife.com/what-is-field-curvature

Which "true" APO lenses do you own?

So much for your claim that primes are better in the distortion/curvature/aberration department than zooms. Such is not always the case, and using generalities to make a case reveals that you do a lot of keyboard surfing and have considerable googling skills, but have little practical experience.

BTW, on another note - please use a decent spell checker -

distortion not distoration
processing, not processsing
wall, not well
aberration, not aberation
least, not leaste

And on a final note, I suppose you've never heard of the the Harley LIVEWIRE™ - which is - you guessed it - an electric Harley that costs $29K.

[ur]https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/future-vehicles/livewire.html?source_cd=SEM_Retention_PPC&_cr=ppc%7cGOOGLE%7cFuture_Vehicles_Brand_B%7cElectric_Motorcycle%7c%2Belectric+%2Bharley&gclid=CjwKCAiA99vhBRBnEiwAwpk-uMWE0Aneztaln_qgsYIWgqTB-kvBGJ4TxwO-qv0CdL2BAzmla5cc4BoCdHYQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds[/url]
Well, when you get to specifics and meaningful dif... (show quote)


Gene, just don’t hold your breath waiting for Bipod to admit to anything that he maybe wrong.

Reply
Jan 10, 2019 23:39:56   #
Bipod
 
tdekany wrote:
Gene, just don’t hold your breath waiting for Bipod to admit to anything that he maybe wrong.

Never mind tdekany, he follows me around like a dog. It gives meaning to his life.

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 01:53:56   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
Bipod wrote:
Never mind tdekany, he follows me around like a dog. It gives meaning to his life.


Who Gene?

Reply
 
 
Jan 11, 2019 10:19:54   #
canon Lee
 
tdekany wrote:
Most in camera hdr photos look like hdr. But my question is, why would it take you a ton of time to merge hdr in LR for example? I use LR and Affinity, both provide natural looking results and doesn’t take long at all


To answer your question. Frankly I use different shooting techniques for different homes. For vacant small cottage types that have no electricity I do bring my flash and I don't use HDR. But for larger homes that are furnished and have larger rooms I shoot ambient light and do use HDR. It all depends on the lighting and room sizes. High contrast rooms I do bracket. The issue I am more concerned with is keystone & barreling. That was the original post. I am looking into Canon 10-18mm, but so far I haven't heard much about that choice here.

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 10:52:15   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
tdekany wrote:
Gene, just don’t hold your breath waiting for Bipod to admit to anything that he maybe wrong.


Not holding my breath - trust me . . .

It's not possible to have a rational discussion with someone who has his own facts.

A troll is a troll is a troll - and I have a great solution



Reply
Jan 11, 2019 11:00:58   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
canon Lee wrote:
To answer your question. Frankly I use different shooting techniques for different homes. For vacant small cottage types that have no electricity I do bring my flash and I don't use HDR. But for larger homes that are furnished and have larger rooms I shoot ambient light and do use HDR. It all depends on the lighting and room sizes. High contrast rooms I do bracket. The issue I am more concerned with is keystone & barreling. That was the original post. I am looking into Canon 10-18mm, but so far I haven't heard much about that choice here.
To answer your question. Frankly I use different s... (show quote)


Could rent one for a few days it shouldn’t be much.

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 11:01:42   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
Gene51 wrote:
Not holding my breath - trust me . . .

It's not possible to have a rational discussion with someone who has his own facts.

A troll is a troll is a troll - and I have a great solution



Reply
 
 
Jan 11, 2019 12:52:44   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
canon Lee wrote:
To answer your question. Frankly I use different shooting techniques for different homes. For vacant small cottage types that have no electricity I do bring my flash and I don't use HDR. But for larger homes that are furnished and have larger rooms I shoot ambient light and do use HDR. It all depends on the lighting and room sizes. High contrast rooms I do bracket. The issue I am more concerned with is keystone & barreling. That was the original post. I am looking into Canon 10-18mm, but so far I haven't heard much about that choice here.
To answer your question. Frankly I use different s... (show quote)


I have attached a review of the lens you mentioned. It seems very comprehensive and honest. Check out the link.

I wish I coud give you a firsthand opinion but I do not own this lens and have not had an opportunity to use or test it. I do find the DP revues to be accurate and honest in that they tent to agree with the equipment I do have experience with. Their performance charts and graphs seem to be compiled from laboratory kinds of testing procedures. There are usually pictures made with the lenses in question accompanying the reviews.

The lens is moderately priced, and as the review mentions, this is not a very fast lens which is not the best choice for very low ligh or action photography. For static subjects, like real estate, architecture and interrogators you are not working in very low light and extended exposures are not problematic. So...why pay for speed you don't need?

If you man concerns are barrel distortion and keystoning, I don't think you will have any issues with this lens. Keystoneing is a function of camera position and leveling the camera. Check out the review- I suspect there will be some barrel distortion in a lens of that short focal length but it may have been minimized in the latest formula. It can probably be corrected in post-processing. In my own work, I will sometimes use a very short focal length to accommodate a limited working space but I try no to extend the composition right up to the edges- I leave a bit of space.

Of, coarse, the investment in this lens is much less that going to a full frame system. If you fine you present camer is?

I started my digital transition with a Nikon cropped system- early on. I went to a full frame Canon because my work ofttimes require very large display prints. In retrospect, many of the images I made with the older system were decent enough for the interior work I was doing at the time.

Business wise, if you are just getting into real estate work, my advice would be to stick with your present system, add the lens if you find the focal length necessary and test I am assuming that the images you are producing now are reproducing well in the real estate ads.

Attached file:
(Download)

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 14:07:00   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Gene51 wrote:
Not holding my breath - trust me . . .

It's not possible to have a rational discussion with someone who has his own facts.

A troll is a troll is a troll - and I have a great solution


I need to know you "supplier" for this "product"! I will order a gross of those cans just to navigate the UHH site!

I don't know for sure if either of theses GENTLEMEN are "trolls' in the true sense of the word. One is convinced that photography is "going to hell in a hand basket"! Unless, that is, if it is all done on film in large format equipment. Kinda REACTIONARY but to each his own. The other GENTLEMEN is more PROGRESSIVE in his equipment choices and methodologies and somehow tends to disagrees, quite vehemently, with the other gentlemen.

Perhaps your spray can convince theses folks to "live and let live"! There is a supplier actively involved in supplying antique and obsolete processing materials- wet plate, cyanotype, platinum, Ambrotype, pinhole cameras etc,- and they have enough customers to keep them in business. There are several online associations of folks who use ONLY large and medium format film gear! There are probably schools of thought, out there, that profess that digital photography is "old hat" and there are much more advanced technologies in the offing.

My sagely advice to both theses nice scholarly folks is COOL IT! Your fighting is screwing up a whole lot of perfectly logical conversations and decent debates.

I still want my case of those spray cans- I'll keep them under my sink with my supply of Raid, DDT, Chlordane and Pyerthrum, rat poison and Mother Fletcher's Super Cockroach Powder(circa 1954).

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 14:18:23   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Bipod wrote:
Never mind tdekany, he follows me around like a dog. It gives meaning to his life.


You really ought to consider the latest cutting edge meds for your condition - I'm sure you won't have any problems getting a script for Risperdal, Zyprexa, Seroquel or similar . . . Just sayin'

Reply
Jan 11, 2019 14:44:59   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
Gene51 wrote:
You really ought to consider the latest cutting edge meds for your condition - I'm sure you won't have any problems getting a script for Risperdal, Zyprexa, Seroquel or similar . . . Just sayin'


Can you believe this guy?

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.