Real Estate Photography - Kicked my butt today!!!

[480sparky]

Started over, left exposure alone...Reduced shadows/highlights a bit and adjust the tone curve a bit.

Looks absolutely FLAT! (Sorry)

Not sure if you mentioned if you shoot raw or JPEG.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Started over, left exposure alone...Reduced shadows/highlights a bit and adjust the tone curve a bit.

Looks absolutely FLAT! (Sorry)

Not sure if you mentioned if you shoot raw or JPEG.

No need to apologize! I agree...I second guess myself and don't have much confidence when processing because I'm red/green color blind (yes, I still see the colors but shades like to elude me) and sometimes a green tint sneaks into my photos as I go along...

Here's another edit working with the adjustment brush in LR to add some saturation, clarity, and to remove some shadows. Seems like it makes it "pop" some but I'm getting tired and might be losing all subtlety with the adjustments at this point.

1035 Sherman - FrontNewEdit2 by mhenson1104, on Flickr

Also, just did a quick search for the wider angle lenses and unless God dumps a bunch of money in my lap or I find a ridiculously great deal on one that's probably not going to be happening any time soon.

Edit: All my shots are RAW.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Started over, left exposure alone...Reduced shadows/highlights a bit and adjust the tone curve a bit.

Looks absolutely FLAT! (Sorry)

Not sure if you mentioned if you shoot raw or JPEG.

What was your process for this? Looks much better without looking too "overcooked" like I'm afraid the one I just posted looks...I like how you pulled a lot of blue into the sky...The sky definitely did not look that good yesterday.

 

[480sparky]

Having access to the original .NEF would be much better to work with.

What's your current budget for a wide lens?

 

[MichaelHenson]

Having access to the original .NEF would be much better to work with.

What's your current budget for a wide lens?

I'd post it but I don't know the best way to do so. Can't post on Flickr and it's too big to post here...Share it from Dropbox or Google Drive?

Probably not a realistic one at the moment. If it's more than $200, it's not an option for me at the moment...Down the road? Very possibly, just not now.

 

[480sparky]

What was your process for this? Looks much better without looking too "overcooked" like I'm afraid the one I just posted looks...I like how you pulled a lot of blue into the sky...The sky definitely did not look that good yesterday.

I used Capture NX2. Sadly, Nikon just flushed their support of it down the toilet.

Basically, I put an S into the curve, selected the front door area to brighten it up, selected the grass and darkened it, and selected the roof for both darkening it a bit and bump up the contrast.

I didn't 'pull' the blue out of the sky... I added it. I selected the drab sky and just dialed up the blue and dialed down the red (the latter to keep it from being purple).

I'm sure the same steps can be replicated in other softwares.

 

[480sparky]

I'd post it but I don't know the best way to do so. Can't post on Flickr and it's too big to post here...Share it from Dropbox or Google Drive?....

Dropbox works, but I won't be able to work on it until tomorrow night.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Ok. Well, I'm heading to bed myself. I'll post the Dropbox link tomorrow.

 

[manaheim]

Some amount of this is a matter of putting lipstick on a pig. An ugly house is an ugly house, and the best pictures you can take are not going to be enough to compensate for it.

My suggestion to you would be to practice on homes of family and friends. Tell them you're practicing for real estate photography and ask them if they'd like to have some pictures of their home. It's nice to have shots like that as keepsakes, and if they ever do sell the house, your pictures might come in handy.

 

[480sparky]

Some amount of this is a matter of putting lipstick on a pig. An ugly house is an ugly house, and the best pictures you can take are not going to be enough to compensate for it.......

But a fantastic photo of an ugly house is still going to be a fantastic photo. While it's not best to present a tarpaper shack as the Taj Mahal, one can still do a good job and present the shack at it's best.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Some amount of this is a matter of putting lipstick on a pig. An ugly house is an ugly house, and the best pictures you can take are not going to be enough to compensate for it.......

But a fantastic photo of an ugly house is still going to be a fantastic photo. While it's not best to present a tarpaper shack as the Taj Mahal, one can still do a good job and present the shack at it's best.

I totally agree, on both counts! My goal with this particular house was to experiment, learn my limitations, and just get some experience. Between the two trips to the house and the thought/examination I've put into it along with the INCREDIBLE feedback and advice I've received here, I've learned a TON!

With this particular house, I'm to the point where I would like to duplicate some of the editing I've seen from 480sparky on the pic of the front of the house to get the experience and to figure out what I need to look for/focus on. I forgot to post the original file this morning but I should be able to do so at lunch today.

 

[manaheim]

Some amount of this is a matter of putting lipstick on a pig. An ugly house is an ugly house, and the best pictures you can take are not going to be enough to compensate for it.......

But a fantastic photo of an ugly house is still going to be a fantastic photo. While it's not best to present a tarpaper shack as the Taj Mahal, one can still do a good job and present the shack at it's best.

Some amount of this is a matter of putting lipstick on a pig. An ugly house is an ugly house, and the best pictures you can take are not going to be enough to compensate for it.......

But a fantastic photo of an ugly house is still going to be a fantastic photo. While it's not best to present a tarpaper shack as the Taj Mahal, one can still do a good job and present the shack at it's best.

I totally agree, on both counts! My goal with this particular house was to experiment, learn my limitations, and just get some experience. Between the two trips to the house and the thought/examination I've put into it along with the INCREDIBLE feedback and advice I've received here, I've learned a TON!

With this particular house, I'm to the point where I would like to duplicate some of the editing I've seen from 480sparky on the pic of the front of the house to get the experience and to figure out what I need to look for/focus on. I forgot to post the original file this morning but I should be able to do so at lunch today.

I completely disagree.

This isn't the same thing as artistic shots or even architectural shots. Real estate pictures need to be the best realistic representation possible of the property in question, but there are some pretty specific things you need to do because you need to show the house... and if you're taking a picture of a harvest gold kitchen with cracked linoleum floor tiles, it's going to look like crap no matter what.

Yes, you can render a very effective photograph and follow all the rules, execute the image well, proper exposure, etc... but in the end, it's a well executed picture of something hideous.

 

[480sparky]

......... but in the end, it's a well executed picture of something hideous.

And even if it's hideous, you still have the technically best image possible.

You're not making an artistic statement here. That's not the purpose of the images. It's not intended to set the viewer into deep thoughts.

If its' a 60's-era harvest gold kitchen with Formica tops, linoleum floors and KraftMaid cabinets, then it should show a harvest gold kitchen with Formica tops, linoleum floors and KraftMaid cabinets. NO ONE has suggested you make it appear it's got granite countertops, stainless steel Viking appliances and Italian marble floors.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Pretty much what y'all said. My goal is to get the well executed photo that shows the strengths of the house in a quick manner that isn't going to require a lot of processing to finish... I'll just keep practicing!

 

[manaheim]

Ah. I think we were saying the same things, and I was just taking it from a negative angle.

I've had a number of buildings I shot that were friggin' ugly. So much so that I got known as the guy who could make ugly buildings look good, so they always called me for those. (which was really annoying because I needed more shots like that foyer I have above to use in my portfolio)