A thread for real estate, architectural, and interior design photography

Well I was starting to get a little concerned. I have not shot a house in 3 weeks. One on my clients called me today and is trying to set up a listing this weekend. Maybe by then my Sigma 12-24 will be in and I can try it out.

P12 wrote in post #13170717
Well I was starting to get a little concerned. I have not shot a house in 3 weeks. One on my clients called me today and is trying to set up a listing this weekend. Maybe by then my Sigma 12-24 will be in and I can try it out.

Excellent! I bet you'll be very happy with the difference. In fact, take a shot with the current lens, and then put the new one one for everyone to see what you're now able to accomplish! It may end up being a sales tool to potential clients. "see - even the prior professional lens I used still didn't open the view up as well I can do now..."

Hahah P12 it's been about that long for me too. Just did a shoot last night though. Clawing my way out of this hole...

How do you decide when to use a telephoto lens vs a wide angle lens when shooting the exterior of a building? I'm scheduled to shoot exterior photos of the local convention center. The client wants "full-building shots". They don't want any artsy closeups. The photos need to show the entire building. There's plenty of room in front of the building to get far enough back to use a telephoto lens. I have a 16-35/f.28, 50/1.4 and 70-200/f.28. I'm planning to shoot with both the 16-35 and the 70-200 and see which looks best, but is there a "standard" lens for shooting building exteriors? I wish I had a tilt-shift lens, as I'll have to fix any perspective distortion with Photoshop CS5.5.

Here's some older photos of the building:
http://www.visittri-cities.com …des/media/image​s/trcc.jpg
http://www.pacwestmeet​ings.com …mbs/threerivers​_thumb.jpg

mikekelley wrote in post #13171313
Hahah P12 it's been about that long for me too. Just did a shoot last night though. Clawing my way out of this hole...

No doubt! 2 weeks with nothing for me too, but shooting one in a couple hours today.

Market seemed to just drop off a cliff. And remember, my real job is RE related too

Right when I was convincing myself I could do 20+ shoots a month with no problem.....lol.

mitchman wrote in post #13171639
How do you decide when to use a telephoto lens vs a wide angle lens when shooting the exterior of a building? I'm scheduled to shoot exterior photos of the local convention center. The client wants "full-building shots". They don't want any artsy closeups. The photos need to show the entire building. There's plenty of room in front of the building to get far enough back to use a telephoto lens. I have a 16-35/f.28, 50/1.4 and 70-200/f.28. I'm planning to shoot with both the 16-35 and the 70-200 and see which looks best, but is there a "standard" lens for shooting building exteriors? I wish I had a tilt-shift lens, as I'll have to fix any perspective distortion with Photoshop CS5.5.

Here's some older photos of the building:
http://www.visittri-cities.com …des/media/image​s/trcc.jpg
http://www.pacwestmeet​ings.com …mbs/threerivers​_thumb.jpg

Interesting question! And there are no definitive answers. Your comment on using a TS lens is correct, and if you are quite close you will need to correct perspective.
Apart from distance restrictions caused by other buildings etc. one of the most important aspects is the way the relative backgrounds stack up.

Sometimes a wider angle helps get rid of distracting BGs by forcing a closer viewpoint. If the background is attractive, however, then a longer viewpoint, or a higher viewpoint from another building, can help you include this...it's all a matter of the location.

The whole fascination with architectural photography is, to me, that there are no fixed rules. Sometimes there are few different positions to achieve a "full-building" shot, in which case your best option for "stand-out" shots may be to pick your time for the most attractive available lighting. It seems to be rather too large to light it up yourself!

I usually prefer longer FL when shooting exteriors, just a preference, though some of my favorite shots of exteriors are 17mm on FF. There's no hard and fast rule, like Ricardo said

THAT being said,

What is wrong with this picture? Something is bugging me and I can't put my finger on it and before I give it to the client I want your feedback because this thread is like the only place I trust to give good feedback on this style of work. It's not like a little nitpicky thing but definitely something 'global' if you know what I mean. But I don't know if it's color balance, sky, contrast, comp (I was shoehorned into this comp by two buildings on either side of me and a sidewalk in front of me so meh) etc etc.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

mikekelley wrote in post #13172499
What is wrong with this picture?

Too much red? You've got three different layers of red colors in there: sky, building, and street. Lower the luminosity (or saturation) in the pink part of the clouds and take a little red tint out of the building, especially the top part with the sign.

Thanks for the advice guys. I think I'll just play it by ear when I get there. I'm shooting at three different times of the day. Morning, evening and night. So hopefully that will give me a better chance at getting some good light. I've never shot HDR before, but I think I might try it for this job.

MIKE: I really like the Cadillac photo. But that said, the only think I could think of that might help make it pop more is to make the exterior light a different color than the interior light. (kinda the same thing Mark-B said)

The sky is nice. I like the image a lot better with 1/2 to 2/3 of the street cropped off.

mikekelley wrote in post #13172499
THAT being said,

What is wrong with this picture? Something is bugging me and I can't put my finger on it and before I give it to the client I want your feedback because this thread is like the only place I trust to give good feedback on this style of work. It's not like a little nitpicky thing but definitely something 'global' if you know what I mean. But I don't know if it's color balance, sky, contrast, comp (I was shoehorned into this comp by two buildings on either side of me and a sidewalk in front of me so meh) etc etc.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

1DM39997 - Version 2 by mike kelley / mpkelley.com, on Flickr

Here's my opinion....the building is the focal point, right? The building has a bit of a yellow hue to it. This is NOT complimented by the red lines in the street or the pink hue in the sky. I think this shot would be better served without the red lines in the street and with a cooler temp sky. Blue tones are the preferred background color to yellow subject matter. However, because the yellow is very soft, your blue tones need to be soft as well. I believe that would put more emphasis on the subject.

When I display the image on my monitor and cover the red lines in the street, the image instantly becomes better. The red lines really pull the eye away from the subject. IMO

Try removing the red lines and see if that does it, or tone them down a bit.

After a second look, I think you just need to crop the street or remove the red lines. The sky looks a lot better that way. It is softer and makes the dealership the strong focal point of the image with a nice soft colorful background. Forget about changing the sky, it is fine if you remove the red lines from the street or crop the street more.

As usual, you guys rule.

I will do a couple more edits- I like both the removing of the tail lights / road idea and the changing the tint/hue of lights and sky. Tyler, I definitely agree now that you mention it, too.