what is wrong with this image

I guess we ran him off.

I am sure he will be back once his business and photographic issues intersect and there is help needed.

Someone mention my name?...........

I’m here.......

Guess it's a bit late by now but here's my version using DXO Photolab 3 and Viewpoint 3. Perspective is corrected but color corrections not so much without the RAW files.

Just a general comment on the topic of architectural interior photography, and how our modern tools compare with traditional methods...

• It used to be that we took great lengths to photography at the right time of day, sometimes mask windows, often use elegantly placed supplemental lighting, etc. to capture photos that were very attractive to the viewer, even if not necessarily an 'accurate portrayal' of how the scene appears in real life.
  
• Today we do not bother with such tecniques, considering them too time consuming and bothersome, and we use digital tools to make up for our greatly reduced effort. But we complain about things that are in fact present in the real world, such as mixed color temperature lighting in interiors. We seek 'reality' but distort that reality thru HDR, rather than using some supplemental interior lighting.
  

"Just a general comment on the topic of architectural interior photography, and how our modern tools compare with traditional methods..."

A few years ago a photographer I know showed me a shot he took of the interior of a high-end retail store, and explained what went into making it. It was a multiple exposure on a single sheet of 4x5 film. There were three sources of ambient light (overhead florescent, lights inside the glass display counters, and incandescent lamps on the counters) as well as his flash. He made a separate exposure for each light source, as well as using a filter on the lens to correct the color temperature for the incandescent lamp exposure. I don't remember if he did Polaroid test shots, but he did do a lot of bracketing, and said the shoot took hours.

The first thing to do here is separate real estate photography from architectural photography.
I do both. And each has a distinct requirement from the clients and a completely different approach from an equipment and aesthetic perspective.

Real Estate photography is intended to document the property for MLS listing. i.e. pictures that will be used, primarily on the web to show prospective buyers what the house's exterior and rooms look like. Seldom does the agent have the aesthetic sensibility to appreciate subtitles of lighting.
Many, maybe most real estate photographers use speedlites and or strobes to light the rooms and control inside to outside exposure balance. Ironically, most of these images tend to be visually flat looking without the depth that can be created with lighting.

Architecture photography on the other hand, is much more deliberate. It's intent is to show the aesthetic intent of the architect. The approach, from the photographers perspective is to reinforce the architects vision.

I routinely shoot 5000 square foot homes selling for 7 figures in an hour. The agents will select between 25 and 50 images for their listing.

On the other hand, I will spend a week photographing a single building for an architect and deliver about 20 images.

Real estate kit is a Canon EOS R, 16-35mm lens. tripod with geared head. I quite using flash about a year ago. Primarily because one of the high end agencies developed a photography guide that encouraged using the light from windows to help shape the interior. It's an approach I'd been using with architecture, primarily because, in my view, the architect's lighting in a space is part of its design.
Processing is a blend of 5 bracketed frames to expand dynamic range, color balancing, and tone curve to improve visual contrast.

Architecture kit is a Fuji GFX 50S with Canon TSE lenses, tripod with geared head. Lot's of exposures focused on lighting in specific areas of the view. Then blending the images in photoshop. Often 10 to 15 frames per finished image.

Depends where you are located regarding revenue on real estate photos. Here you would make 50 a shoot, even for a 5000 SQ foot home. And in these parts too, a 5000 ft2 home is pretty common.

With houses being on the market for about 24-48 hours before the offers come in, there is little need for creatively lit room shots, just good shots to give clients an idea of which homes they are going to visit each day.

There isn't any real market here for this kind of photography, but there is money in drone shots and this why I have a P4.

Late to the dance as usually.... but HDR is for the ........... anyway. Particularly on this shot, it would be easier just to slit the image into tow layers, correct the exposure for each with the window being one layer, and the rest of the shot being the other. Then mask the window, erase the window area exposing the correct exposure underneath. That way you have two correctly exposed images. Then just flatten the image layers into one and your done. Since the window is a nice rectangle shape, this should be relatively fast to do.

That is just how I approach things like this. Never been really happy with any HDR I've done, and most of the other hdr I've seen, doesn't look very good either. But that is just my taste.

This thread was discussing the colors in the image, not the lens anomalies. Wow, this just won't die away!

The guy who framed the walls was on acid.

3 1/2 year old thread and going strong, yippeee!

Not yet a vampire, but certainly getting aged.