Real Estate Photography

xendless xurbia

Hi Guys,

I recently came upon an opportunity to take photo's of homes for a real estate agent. I told her that I would not expect payment on the first 2 attempts, as it was a test run for her. I did not want to impose on something that I myself am not too familiar with.

Hence the reason I've come here!

I have a couple of questions regarding her criteria.

First she tells me that most of todays real estate photographs tend to exaggerate the size of the rooms due to the use of wide angle lenses. I know for sure that I will not me using 18mm to take most of the room shots. What height and what focal length should be used to mimic the view the eye sees. In other words, what focal length represents what our eye sees. Correct me if I'm wrong, but 50mm on a 1.5 crop body seems to be close.

Secondly, she likes very real looking photo's but doesn't mind a bit of touch ups here and there. I want to convince her that subtle HDR is a valuable tool in real estate. Do you buy that?

Also, I'm pretty sure that a tripod is needed for longer shutter speeds, as well as a cable release. I'm thinking of going f/8 for most shots. Would you guys risk going higher and possibly losing sharpness through lens defraction?


thanks,

I need help and advise!

Jason

nxthree

I've been doing some real estate photography for a local home builder. I understand your agent's desire for the "real" look, but the goal is to make the houses look as good as you possibly can so people will stop by and take a look, and hopefully buy the place.

Big rooms. Bright rooms. Blemish free. Clear of debris.

Move furniture out of the way to make the rooms look bigger. Use a wide angle lens. Use lots of off camera flashes. Expose for the windows - light the rest of the room.

I use a 12-24mm. Usually around f/8. On a tripod. With a remote release and as much off camera flash as I can.

Check out http://photographyforrealestate.net/ for more pointers.

Good luck,
Brian

Qarik

50mm on FF is close to the human eye. That said..I wouldn't use it:

1) that's not what your client wants
2) I don't think there is any "deception" going on using wide angle..it does captures more of the room in the frame.

Think about it..a person can walk into a room and scan it with few turns of their heads. A 50mm shot just can't compare to thet kind of ability. And if you take several different shot withs with 50mm from different angles then you have the problem of someone trying to "stich" them together in their heads.

kdog

xendless xurbia wrote:

I want to convince her that subtle HDR is a valuable tool in real estate. Do you buy that?

You shouldn't need to convince her of anything. HDR is a tool, like anything else. I'd try it both ways. If the HDR shots look better, then go with those. I don't think it's worth mentioning unless you want to explain why your shots look better than your competition.

Regarding the lens size, I agree with the others. You need a super-wide to capture an entire room from a corner. If that's the shot the client wants, then that's the shot she should get.

xendless xurbia

Thanks for your tips and advice. I guess I was thinking along all those lines the whole time, but I needed assurance that I wasn't going nuts!

Anywho, here's an example of what I mean by using subtle HDR. Granted this just an architectural shot, and not really a "real estate" photo.

wildviper

I have actually done a few shots lately of a couple of new hotels that opened up.

Check out my gallery for ideas: SpringHill Suites & Hampton Inn & Suites

Here is my setup: Nikon D70s with a Nikkor 12-24/4. Majority of the shots are based on taking 5 exposures and blending them together. I am not using HDR, per se...Enfused method. Then I fix it in Lightroom for contrast and what not.

It is a lot more work, but, I think it does a good job. I have gotten three more jobs due to the first SpringHill shots.

I am not using flashes cause I am not savvy enough on that yet. Once I experiment, I may use that like Scott Hargis.

Hope that helps.