Shooting real estate pictures (Page 2): Ah....the universal solution for those who don't know how to expose. --Bob...

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Ah....the universal solution for those who don't know how to expose.
--Bob

delottphoto wrote:

HDR

clemente21

There is a ton of information out there regarding this subject. I tend to follow Scott Hargis. Although he is more commercial he also has residential projects as well. He is not your $100 a shoot photographer, but you could learn a lot about his tricks.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

For RE photos, I use mostly my 14-24 but also my 24-70. Flash, sometimes multiple units. I find I take lots of multiple shots which I combine in HDR in Lightroom. My goal here is balanced lighting and a final result that does NOT scream HDR. Once you start, you will learn tricks and tips as you go. You also need to balance time spent vs. dollars paid. Best of luck.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

rmalarz wrote:

Ah....the universal solution for those who don't know how to expose.
--Bob

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

rmalarz wrote:

Ah....the universal solution for those who don't know how to expose.
--Bob

I disagree. A solution for getting a properly exposed interior AND exterior (view out the window) in the image when you can't (or don't want to) come back when the light would be more balanced. VERY useful, if used properly. Best of luck.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

rmalarz wrote:

Ah....the universal solution for those who don't know how to expose.
--Bob

This is another way I tried a while ago - it does take time to shoot, but the results can be stunning. It's done with a single, remotely triggered speed light, multiple exposures, and manual blending.

https://lefeverphoto.com/methods/speedlite-interior/

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Shoot RAW. If you use a tripod (recommended) suggest using either the 2 second delay in camera or a remote. Using live view can help.Camera bodies not as important as lenses IMO. In general, a FL of 10-22 is nice on APS-C bodies, 16-35 works well on FF. Not sure about your area but more realtors and companies that shoot real estate in this area are trending toward asking for drone and video also from their photographers. It can be simple and fast (45 min.-1 hour) or as complicated as you need to make it in order to remain competitive (2-3 hours, depending on the price range of the property, daytime or evening, light painting, etc. and the demands of the realtor specifically and the local market in general.) It can also be a lot of fun. Lightroom is usually enough, but PS or PSE can help also. Bubbee is spot on with balancing ambient with flash. Lots of free tutorials on youtube on RE photography.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Gene51 wrote:

This is another way I tried a while ago - it does take time to shoot, but the results can be stunning. It's done with a single, remotely triggered speed light, multiple exposures, and manual blending.

https://lefeverphoto.com/methods/speedlite-interior/

Wow! Let's hope that the broker is paying more than a hundred and fifty bucks for those shots. Magazine quality takes a lot of effort, and most clients don't want to pay for it.

I am often amazed at the poor quality of real estate photos, even on high end listings. And then I ask some of my local brokers what the going rate is, and it all becomes clear. In the age of the cellphone camera, expectations have come down dramatically. The purpose of listing photos is to make the potential buyer want to visit the property - the photos don't sell property, they sell showings. I am of the opinion that fewer and better photos are the best way to entice potential buyers.

Andy

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

repleo wrote:

What exactly is meant by 'real estate pictures' Are they photos of houses etc for Realtor listings or Architectural / Interiors intended for publishing in magazines etc.

I would think both.

Dennis

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

AndyH wrote:

Wow! Let's hope that the broker is paying more tha... (show quote)

I agree - and putting high quality RE shots in front of the average broker is a case of pearls before swine - they have no clue what they are looking at. So I no longer bother. But when I sold my house, I took my own pics, after seeing what the expensive "pro" ($175 per house) did for some other properties.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

Gene51 wrote:

I agree - and putting high quality RE shots in front of the average broker is a case of pearls before swine - they have no clue what they are looking at. So I no longer bother. But when I sold my house, I took my own pics, after seeing what the expensive "pro" ($175 per house) did for some other properties.

Absolutely true...

A good real estate photographer will have thousands invested in equipment and is offering professional perspective and lighting. Most get less to eat at the end of the day than the cheapskate realtors dog...

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

AndyH wrote:

Wow! Let's hope that the broker is paying more tha... (show quote)

I am surprised at the amazingly poor quality as well, but we’re living in an age when everyone with a T3 has become a $300 “wedding photographer” and cell phones are used for real estate photos. Not long ago when shopping for a property, I thought if I wanted to start shooting real estate, it would be easy to find perspective clients - just go through MLS and contact about half the agents. On the other hand, if they are willing to advertise with photos of that quality, would they pay for first rate work? Like Gene, when I sold my last house, not only did I handle the sale, I photographed the property including a video “walk thru” (and you can bet the verticals were vertical 😸).

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

TriX wrote:

I am surprised at the amazingly poor quality as we... (show quote)

As a professional real estate developer for forty years, I buy several properties a year. My most recent adaptive re-use took well over a year to find the "right" property for conversion to a group home, and we visited nearly 100 sites, and l went through many times that number of listings. If you're listing a commercial property at mid six figure prices, you'd think that you'd be willing to spend three or four hundred dollars to get someone to take a look in the flesh, but you'd be absolutely wrong in that assumption. In addition, many brokers make the mistake in listing these properties, of not having a clue what a prospective developer is interested in. For many of my projects, a nice shot of the electric service entrance and the framing is more important than a pretty view of the interior space with a perfect balance of interior and outside exposures. Good brokers know their market for a particular property, and choose their photo presentation accordingly. Bad brokers use bad photos.

Andy

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Capturing moments wrote:

Would love some tips on shooting real estate pictures!

Don't get involved if you want to make serious money....

thephotoman Loc: Rochester, NY

That is a great tip. I will try on my next shoot. Actually practice it before then.