g._snow

Can anyone tell me the name of a certified color analysis test available for the general public. I'm looking to add something like that to my resume. Is there a test that is a industry standard and respected, even if only available to professionals who administer it?

Thanks!

Moderator note - moved to Casual Conversation to garner wider readership

I'm baffled - how does one resize an image from 2048 × 1536 to 1242 × 1138 or 1242 × 1067? That's a substantial change in aspect ratio from 4:3 to almost square - and obviously, there is no crop involved. I tried this in PS and even when saving the image as lowest quality JPEG (3), I can't reproduce the effect seen in the images above - I only get skewed images - which it appears the resized images above are not. Some weird resizing/interpolation going on here.

 

PS: when I downloaded your files, only the first was larger than 1200K, the second one is less than 1000. Though not sure what photo.net does to the upload.

I think it’s something the algorithm in LR does automatically when export settings are set to output for screen.

Thanks. The three way phone call experience that you had is unfortunate.

 

Probably useful to note here - When attempting to resolve or explain an issue to a Client, any Vendor whose first volley is to Attribute Blame, rather than collaborative seeking 'The Answer' usually ends up in a poor light, if not immediately, eventually.

 

Most 'intelligent' Clients reckon something like: "sheesh if they're so intent on handing out blame and not simply wanting to ‘fix it’ - what does that say about their Customer Service Disciplines when I need assistance?"

 

I make that comment because a relation of mine was involved in a Doctoral Study focusing on Client Awareness and Reaction, (both conscious and unconscious) to Vendors’ Methods of Problem Solving - it was a large sample group > 5000.

 

WW

Exactly! My client shared with me that she did email the local MLS support to share the experience and note that she was disappointed in the customer support she received from the MLS CSR and that she was not at all helpful. In the end it all worked out and the agent hired me for another job that I’m actually heading out to now.

This community is very helpful. If you notice my first post a couple of years ago when I was starting out on the real estate photography venture you can see how much I’ve learned and how far I’ve come. Thanks for the feedback!

Good that you now know the cause of the malfunction - thanks for posting that the matter is now resolved.

 

 

 

Was the 'technical issue' described in detail?

 

WW

I did not receive the email from MLS about the technical issue on that particular day as I’m not a member of MLS and the agent did not share it with me, she simply said there was indeed a problem on their end. After I posted this question on photo.net (I was frantically exhausting all research options on what was causing this to happen) I had a three-way call with myself, the agent, and our local MLS support. It really made me look bad in front of my client because at that time the MLS CSR insisted that my files were too big and MLS had to compresss them, but I knew they were no different size than any files I have ever delivered for MLS purposes without any problems, and I even sent the agent smaller files to try with no different result. Luckily my client knows now that it was a problem on MLS’ end.

As a first step, I recommend you resize your photos to meet the specifications of the publisher. With such a dramatic loss of detail, MLS may be resizing to a much smaller size, then upsizing to fit a certain format. Photoshop and Lightroom have better algorithms for resizing which retain more detail. There are sharpening methods tailored to the final size which help even further.

Yep, I had my Lightroom settings the same as I always do when exporting to deliver to client for MLS and never had a problem before, although those settings are for the maximum MLS requirements so maybe I’ll change them in the future to be a little less than maximum limits

Not commenting on the technical aspect of what happened or why - on the business aspect of this matter, I suggest you send the agent smaller files ASAP - I assume (hopefully) you've done that already.

 

WW

 

(BTW It was I who moved this thread)

I did that of course but they uploaded with the same problem

Moderator please move if this belongs in digital darkroom...wasn’t sure where to put it.

Moderator Note - I have moved this conversation to Digital Darkroom, from Business of Photography because although it is a business related question DD should reap responses addressing the technical aspect.

Notwithstanding the above, responses related to the business aspect of the thread, are encouraged.

I delivered photos to a client yesterday in which I did everything the same as I always do (most importantly export settings in LR...I double checked these a bazillion times) delivered them to her the same way on Dropbox but I got a call from agent saying they looked “grainy” on MLS. It looks like MLS compressed the ALOT. MLS CSR told her that the files were too big and that’s why but my understanding is if file is too big for MLS agent will get an error message while uploading. Anyone out there with experience dealing with technical problems and MLS. My images are sized 2048 X 1536 and while they exceed the 12K limit of MLS uploads (they are around 2.4-3.5 MB) MLS has never had problems compressing them without losing so much quality.

I'm new to shooting real estate. Also new to anything having to do with the real estate industry.) I recently looked at my client's online listing (MLS.com) and the photos I gave her are being cropped on the website. After looking into it I learned that the MLS website utilizes a 4:3 aspect ratio for pictures. I have a DSLR plus my current lens is 16-85mm (I plan to purchase a wider lens in the near future) so I really can't afford for much of the image to get cropped on these online listings. I have a lot of questions and hoping some of you can give me examples of how you deal with aspect ratio efficiently during your workflow, especially export. For example:

1. Should I be putting every image on a template that is a 4:3 ratio, and how? Should I set my crop ration to 4:3?

2. Not knowing what different needs a client may have for various outputs, should I have more than one template based on different sizes, aspect ratios, DPI etc. and saving each image to them individually?

3. Is there a simple way to address these concerns during output settings in LR?

below I cropped with 3:2 ratio and the edited, but if I'm going to crop to 4:3 then the composition is bad. What's more important when working within the limitations of my current equipment...editing for good composition or ratio and other details of final output?

yes, all of the above I have set. Good point. I should probably get some radio triggers. do you recommend a particular brand?

One more thought, I can get the SB800 to fire when set in TTL mode but not manual.

Your work is OK-ish for representation in non-luxury or non upmarket segment! As for tech quality, many people told you the right proper things. My 5-cents: don't overexpose, watch WB, use flashes system.

 

 

Did you pass Rabkin color tests? Did you calibrate the monitor?

 

I conclusion I find your shots OK-ish but they look too flat and this is the lens's case, you use a flat, cheap lens with plastic elements.

Good point...no I have not calibrated my monitor in ages

this thread is dire.

I graduated art school concentrating in photography way back in 2001 (a fact to some to some of you who commented on my first thread may come as a surprise seeing as how I made some grossly technical mistakes during my first attempt at shooting interiors. I was surprised at how many brain cells I lost while raising five kids and leaving my camera in it's bag for 10 plus years.) Trust me, I would much rather be shooting more interesting subjects rather than real estate interiors but I'm just trying to pay the bills, and thank you to everyone for your helpful comments.

On the "tight shots" versus "wide shots" - I concur with Phil's comments: where I work Agents will either want a shoot for a large spread, in which case there are tight shots included; on the other hand many shoots comprise wide shots only for a small budget spread, being a brochure and ads comprising five to seven wide shots only.

 

Real Estate marketing varies. I was recently in Chicago and there were many small-roomed homes for sale I particular noted that tight shots often punctuated and accented the larger wider rooms shots - this is not as typical for the same type of small house here.

 

My point being you need to know what YOUR marketing trend is - and that fad will change from time to time.

 

WW

The agents that I feel like I will most likely attract while I'm just starting out will be paying for images to simply use in online listings. The reason why I question whether or not I need a wider lens is that, since they are limited to how many images they can use in a single listing, they will want to show as much of the space as possible in one image. Would you agree? I found it challenging to show that the living room had vaulted ceilings and still create a visually appealing composition. I shot the living room both ways, showing vaulting ceiling and another with what I thought was a better composition, and she did use both in her listing.

You shot everything with the lights on which can complicate things with white balance if there are different kinds of color temperature lights on in the house at the same time and causes all kinds of unwanted reflections when not using external speedlights. Some will swear with house lights on, others with the house lights off. I shoot mainly with lights off (bathrooms are exceptions) and never had a complaint about that (sometimes it’s good to have indirect light on for atmosphere or in interiors that are too dark without lights on).

 

 

There are a lot of blown-out highlights in your examples but which shouldn’t be a problem with a neutral and natural HDR workflow and which I would recommend for starters. You also need to take care of keeping all the verticals straight which can also be done quickly as an import preset in Lightroom and with some additional fine-tuning while editing (I also use an import preset for white balance, and then fine-tune when needed).

 

 

Shots 1 and 2 aren’t that bad compositionally but shot five and six, as well as the bedroom shots, are lacking a balanced composition. For the bathroom shots, you could benefit with going a bit wider. Don’t hesitate to shoot verticals for tight spaces like small bathrooms or toilets (I always skip toilets, agents will seldom ask for a toilet shot, but if they do ask, vertical is the way to go).

 

 

Tight shots vs. wide shots is another one of those “vs.” things among real estate photographers. Agents will always want wide shots or shots that communicate as much as possible of a room in a single image, remember the aim is in providing information to the potential buyer. But wide shots doesn’t mean making rooms look like a ballroom and making them look much bigger than in reality because that’s a recipe for disappointment when the potential buyer visits the home. I most often shoot at 10mm on a DX (Sigma 10-20mm) BUT I crop the image afterward to get to a more realistic scale of the room. Why not shoot tighter, to begin with? Because shooting wider allows for more and better fine-tuning in the composition of the shot in post than you have time for when on location when on a busy schedule. But shooting wider doesn’t mean not taking care of the main composition in-camera and making sure that that’s covered. In the cases where the composition is off in your examples you have placed the camera too high, for example.

 

 

So you first have to cover the wider shots, and then you can also throw in some additional tighter shots. Think of your wide shots as the ones that provide all the information of the space and the tighter shots as the bonus ones that aren’t necessarily information based but can provide a sense of feeling and atmosphere of the place. I have begun to incorporate more of such tighter shots in my shooting when shooting in homes and interiors that call for it.

As far as shooting verticals, I was told by another real estate photographer that I had to shoot everything horizontal, otherwise agents would not be able to use the images on the mls website. Is that not true?

You shot everything with the lights on which can complicate things with white balance if there are different kinds of color temperature lights on in the house at the same time and causes all kinds of unwanted reflections when not using external speedlights. Some will swear with house lights on, others with the house lights off. I shoot mainly with lights off (bathrooms are exceptions) and never had a complaint about that (sometimes it’s good to have indirect light on for atmosphere or in interiors that are too dark without lights on).

 

 

There are a lot of blown-out highlights in your examples but which shouldn’t be a problem with a neutral and natural HDR workflow and which I would recommend for starters. You also need to take care of keeping all the verticals straight which can also be done quickly as an import preset in Lightroom and with some additional fine-tuning while editing (I also use an import preset for white balance, and then fine-tune when needed).

 

 

Shots 1 and 2 aren’t that bad compositionally but shot five and six, as well as the bedroom shots, are lacking a balanced composition. For the bathroom shots, you could benefit with going a bit wider. Don’t hesitate to shoot verticals for tight spaces like small bathrooms or toilets (I always skip toilets, agents will seldom ask for a toilet shot, but if they do ask, vertical is the way to go).

 

 

Tight shots vs. wide shots is another one of those “vs.” things among real estate photographers. Agents will always want wide shots or shots that communicate as much as possible of a room in a single image, remember the aim is in providing information to the potential buyer. But wide shots doesn’t mean making rooms look like a ballroom and making them look much bigger than in reality because that’s a recipe for disappointment when the potential buyer visits the home. I most often shoot at 10mm on a DX (Sigma 10-20mm) BUT I crop the image afterward to get to a more realistic scale of the room. Why not shoot tighter, to begin with? Because shooting wider allows for more and better fine-tuning in the composition of the shot in post than you have time for when on location when on a busy schedule. But shooting wider doesn’t mean not taking care of the main composition in-camera and making sure that that’s covered. In the cases where the composition is off in your examples you have placed the camera too high, for example.

 

 

So you first have to cover the wider shots, and then you can also throw in some additional tighter shots. Think of your wide shots as the ones that provide all the information of the space and the tighter shots as the bonus ones that aren’t necessarily information based but can provide a sense of feeling and atmosphere of the place. I have begun to incorporate more of such tighter shots in my shooting when shooting in homes and interiors that call for it.

With all due respect, this thread belongs in the Business of Photography forum.

I questioned that myself before posting but thanks for commenting

I'm working on starting a real estate photography business. This was my first shoot and she asked me to do another one next week so I feel good about that, but I showed these pics to friend of mine who is a real estate agent and she said they were "better than what someone could do with their own camera but not as good as what a professional would take." I plan to experiment with different methods and workflow (HDR, off-camera flash, flash-ambient blending etc.,) but for this house I did not use flash (simply because I left the batteries in my speed lights the last time I used them years ago and they weren't powering on,) bracketed, and corrected exposure in lightroom/photoshop. Shooting interiors is a lot more challenging than I expected, so any advice from those of you with experience in real estate photography would be greatly appreciated. I'm specifically wanting to know if my lens is not wide enough for smaller house like this one. The agent did mention that she wished she could have seen more of the kitchen. Right now I have a Nikon 16-85mm. Thanks in advance for your comments.

This looks like a high ISO shot which is NOT what you want. It sounds like the photographer that you are following is working on the cheap. In high end real estate, the photographers use multiple lights, often gelled, to balance the light around the room, high light features and balance the light outside of the windows. Even a speedlite with a dome pointed straight up can give you good results. You just have to care that the objects closer to the camera are not over lit.

 

I'm not sure that I get the idea of "shooting dark" and correcting. If anything, I might go the other way.

Thanks got your comment! I’m curious, why is a high ISO bad for real estate purposes. I set the ISO high because I was planning on “shooting dark,” per other photographer’s advice, which I interpreted as underexposing entire image so as to not blow out highlight detail. Would a lot of grain really make a difference if images were just going to be viewed online for real estate purposes?

Greetings. I am trying to start a real estate photography business. Not sure if this should go under the practice and technique forum but I'll start here. I spoke to a successful real estate photographer in my area and was on-site at a listing he was shooting. He only had his camera and his tripod and said he shot everything dark, to avoid blowing out highlights, and corrected exposure in post. I have been practicing photographing interiors this way and, granted I have a learning curve to work through with lightroom, the images look terrible. I usually try to get things right with my camera too eliminate too much post-processing, but I don't have experience shooting interiors. I have Nathan Cool's book, "Photography for Real Estate Interiors," and, while I haven't read it yet, his workflow is a combination of flash and flash/ambient light blending in photoshop. While I have the Nikon speed light system and a lightstand I've never had much use for them, so if I am going to incorporate flash when shooting interiors I will also have a learning curve there as well. Most photographers I know are real perfectionists, including myself, but at this point I am trying to figure out a workflow that is "good enough" and get my portfolio built and website up as quickly as possible. My husband may be losing his job in the next few months. I am a busy mom and I have to be focused on bringing in income, not trying to be the best real estate photographer in the world. There will be time to work on a better technique in the future. The attached file is a work in progress. If I am going to underexpose to preserve highlight I obviously have to learn how to correct for it in post. I haven't been shooting for years and am very rusty. My question is, would it be conceivable to give realtors decent real estate interior photos without the use of flash. I know there is a demand for real estate photographers in my area but am at a point where I need to decide on my workflow before working on a portfolio. Thanks for your comments.

<p>If your'e really serious about speaking with he's at Georgia State University's Ernest G Welch School of Art and Design.<br>

<a href="http://www.cas.gsu.edu/departments_units.html">http://www.cas.gsu.edu/departments_units.html</a><br>

<a href="http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwart/art_design/2400.html">http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwart/art_design/2400.html</a><br>

Actually, from the looks of their website it looks like they have a new Director. I had many classes under her back in the late 90's. (And I do appreciate what I <em>did</em> achieve with my degree)</p>

<p>Thanks everyone. I'm beginning to put my own opinion of "good enough" into perspective. And judging by some of your own workflows, I don't think I'm setting my standards to high at all. But I have learned areas where I'm overdoing it, such as looking at EVERY image 100%, and will definetely be setting up some function keys for most used actions. So I WILL NOT compromise my standards and continue to looks for other ways to speed up my workflow. With my most recent paid portrait session, although I had a blast, I averaged about $15/hr after all was said and done. I'd like to be doing much better than that.<br>

As far as my BFA (Bachelors of Fine Art) in photography, I agree with David. With any other fine art discipline ideally the student should have a working knowledge of all the tools available to them. If they don't it only limits creative potential. I think it should be no different with photography. In fact, before entering the photography concentration we were required to take fundamental art courses - drawing, 2 dimensional design, color theory - to learn the fundamentals of art. Shouldn't <em><strong>light</strong></em>, all sources of light including speedlights, be <strong><em>fundamental</em></strong> to photography, no matter what your approach?!! I can get fired up on this topic b/c I'm still paying for the stupid degree.</p>

<p>Thanks for the technical advice everyone.<br>

David - I'm not sure what you're fishing for but I'm interested to find out. The photographer I am working with hasn't seen this image yet, but regarding another image (slightly underexposed and visible noise at 100%) his response was "I don't look at my images like you do. Lighten it up a little in PS and it will be fine. Regarding my sense of frustration with a 12 hr workflow, he suggested that I may be a control freak (specifically in regards to viewing every image at 100% and color correcting.) In fact, working with this photographer has made me question whether I AM spending way too much time and energy in post production. The first time I shot with him he showed me the final images (mine and his) he gave to the client for proofing. It appeared to me that he did very little post-production: images were not straightened or cropped, color wasn't all that consistent (he has lab color correct prints), and he had at least one image (in color) showing IMO a lot of noise. As far as school goes, hindsight is 20/20. I avoided flash b/c it was hard, and I was having fun making conceptual art and getting good critiques. I was not interested in improving my technical skills. So there you go - analyze that :)<br>

Nadine - If I summarize in one sentence what I'm asking it would be "Is this image good enough to show a client?" Yes, I am wanting to shorten my workflow but not at the expense of producing good results.</p>