I like to use Clarity for my real estate shots. I apply different levels of contrast to different components. For example, micro and low contrast brings out the grain in wooden cabinetry and adds punch to clouds. Other components benefit from the smoothing effect of reduced contrast. The old Topaz Labs version allows me to apply the contrast and then mask it out everywhere else but the new Topaz Studio version does not have the masking feature. The newer version is supposed to be improved in that the different levels of contrast are more discrete and do not overlap with each other as does the Topaz Labs version. Maybe that aspect is an improvement, I don't know, because the lack of masking ability does not allow me to easily treat different components differently and so I still use the old version.

I was in the same situation about three months ago. I am a real estate agent and use a large sensor point and shoot, Cannon G1X II. I had been reading on this excellent site about how much improvement can be achieved by shooting in RAW. I downloaded some free trials but, as you say, the results were not right. I finally tried LightRoom. It works great for me. I particularly like the highlight and shadow sliders. There are many great free online tutorials. I now have much improved capability to handle a larger dynamic range.

I have done exterior price opinions for companies that service banks for years. These reports include photos of the house, front angle of the house, house numbers, street view, street sign. Usually it is a distressed situation or one bank selling a portfolio of loans to another. The homeowner is not aware that a report has been ordered. I usually can take all photos from within my car but I am aware that I look suspicious just as does the guy in the photo. These reports are being done everyday all over the nation.

I agree. In my area, they even use extreme wide-angle for exterior shots. They use great equipment; high dynamic range; but emphasising the foreground so strongly is not a good marketing photo in my opinion.

I have used Corel PSP for 15 years and recently have started to use Topaz Clarity plug-in. Clarity offers four different levels of contrast. In my real estate photos, I can smooth out lawns and walls and blue sky while enhancing granite counter tops, wooden cabinetry, cloudy sky, brick/stone exteriors, and hills in the landscape.

Not sure :-) What I love so much about this forum is that I find out about things that I didn't know I didn't know.

But as far as I know, Paint Shop Pro has served me well for 16 years. I mostly use the Fill Light.

Paint Shop Pro is all that I have ever used. I have always wondered if I am missing something good by not using the Photoshop family.

Thanks, good to contemplate the use of auxiliary lighting and the photos are an excellent example of what can be accomplished and of increased image quality. But in terms of composition, maybe it's just me, but I don't see tripod level photos as always being the proper choice; particularly in kitchens. True, tripod level makes vertical line distortion easy to deal with but I think it interferes with presenting what it is that is being offered for purchase. Buyers are more interested, based on my showing experience, with a good look at cabinetry, flooring, and countertops than they are with evaluating the technical correctness of vertical lines. But I also think that I could do a better job of handling vertical lines. If a photographer, as does a chess player, can think a move ahead he can add a bit of space to allow for vertical line correction.

As I stated in my original post, this forum has been most helpful to me in showing me what it is that I don't know. It never much occured to me to care about vertical lines but now that I know I have worked on some photos with my PSP perspective correction tool and have discovered how to combat the distortion.

Up until the last couple of years, I never noticed very wide angles in the MLS presentations. In the past, the photos were so badly compressed that hiring a pro didn't occur to high end realtors. But now that the pros have become involved, tripods and very wide angles are being employed. I suppose that this type of photography will become the norm. The Sony A7 does provide an alternative; tilting viewfinder, large sensor, image stabilization, interchangeable lens. Perhaps this new camera will produce something better than the present norm.

Good suggestion, thanks

Do both! I think that is the answer :-)

You got it; thanks. A small half bath is an easy call, either don't photograph or shoot from overhead and live with the results. A Buyer would like to know what the bathroom looks like so I choose to include the photo. But other rooms are not such an easy call and many may agree with mallen1330 on how best to handle it.

The photo to the left is from a property that I marketed in early 2013. This was with my old camera Samsung TL500, 1/1.7 sensor size, 24 mm. MLS had a 640 x 480 size restriction at that time. We are evaluating composition, not image quality. The photo to the right was when the property returned to market last June, 1280 x 960 now allowed, and marketed by a big firm. This photo is obviously about tripod level and is much wider than 24mm. It does a nice job of showing the window views of adjoining breakfast room and living room, has better vertical perspective, but my opinion, does not very well show the granite countertop and the nice wooden cabinetry. It may be a better composition of the overall house but not such a good capture of the kitchen, my opinion.

Perhaps there is a place for both. Perhaps that is the answer to my question :-) what is gained? answer: choice.

That's it! Thanks!

Like I stated previously, I am not a professional photographer but I am a professional house presenter. This property is a Fannie Mae foreclosure that was lived in HARD :-) It has holes, it has stains, it needs repair. An Investor will purchase and I want him to see. A tripod in a half bath will miss the toilet - that is true - and will literally miss everything else. Buyers are more interested in what is offered for purchase than "correct vertical perspective". I come here looking for advice on how to improve image quality but, trust me, I know what is best to put in the frame.

I see, thanks. Sorry for the confusion. 4/3 is what I entered to find the camera on dpreview. 1.5 is not one of the search options.

Your reply is very helpful and confirms what I have been thinking before posing the question. I spent about $800 for this camera but it seems to have capability, for my use, of a camera costing much more. I already knew that the sensor size was comparable but what I didn't know was how comparable is the lens quality. It seems counter intuitive that my previous supposition would be true. Since these interchangeable lens cost so much, one would suppose that a great benefit would be derived. Also, it makes me wonder why no similar camera with a full frame is not available. It makes me wonder why sales and critical review of Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II is not better.

I market a lot of property that is of mid and low value. It is not feasible to hire a photographer and furthermore MY PHOTOS ARE BETTER :-) My photos are better than the vast majority of realtors who use a cell phone or some other inferior camera. Arguably, my photos are better than the pros who do the multimillion dollar property. The pros put a DSLR on a tripod, often times with a wider than 24 mm lens. They do a great job of exposing shadow. They do a great job of exposing a beautiful lake view through a window while simultaneously properly exposing the interior of the room. But its all from tripod level. The best photo, my opinion, of a nice granite kitchen counter top is from way over my head shooting down while framing with tilting LCD. The best view of a living room is not a 18 mm shot from a tripod that highlights a foreground piece of furniture or foreground flooring. Yes, it makes the room look larger but the distortion is so great that, my opinion, Buyers discount and are not fooled. Many of these presentations use the wide angle on exterior shots; highlighting foreground grass or foreground driveway leaving the house somewhat de emphasized.

About a year and a half ago, I received what I feel like was good advice on the forum from poster, Armadillo, on how to handle the common situation of the beautiful window view in the bright window in the less bright room.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-230015-3.html#3879811

But I still don't think that I have quite the capability shown in the multimillion presentations. Superior composition, yes; but not quite the image quality. Of course a few years ago, I wouldn't even try to match these presentations. When I was using the point and shoot Cannon S70 it wasn't even an issue. I'm just a realtor not a photographer, the MLS degraded the photos anyway, no one expected a DSLR, I was still superior.

But now, MLS systems have improved and if a realtor presents a good photo the online viewer gets to see it. And so I plan my next move. I am happy with my Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II and I am even happier with it after interacting with all of you wonderful folks on this forum. I don't want to give up my tilting/articulating view finder even if it means that I must give up some image quality horsepower. I believe that the Sony A7 is the just about the only option that offers both increased sensor size and proper view finder. But is the upgrade worth it? I thought that perhaps the ability to use interchangeable lenses would be part of the answer. So for, I think not. Perhaps in the next year other cameras will become available. The market seems to have rejected cameras such as Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II. I suppose that robertjerl provided the answer: I only do one type of photography so a 24-120mm works for me but most desire to use other lenses.

Thanks to everyone :-)

I see. Thanks :-)

I like to use a lot of post processing fill light for difficult interior shots. My Canon PowerShot G1 X Mark II with 1.5″ sensor gives me much better capability with shadows than my previous smaller sensored cameras and makes me speculate that a full frame sensor would be even better. Presently, the Sony Alpha 7 series, S would be my choice, combines a full frame sensor with titling view finder capability.

Such a camera would force me into the world of interchangeable lenses :-)