Do any of you use professional Real Estate Photographers, or do you produce most of the images yourselves?

Everything produced in house with Canon EOS5D2 and Adobe CS4. It is not cost effective to pay a pro to do your photographs. Many times a listing will have to be photographed several different times depending on improvements, change of seasons, etc. A good realtor will spend significant time, effort, and money on becoming proficient in architectural photography.

I agree....you can pay someone to professionally shoot them, but if this is your long term career, make the investment to buy the quality equipment to do it yourself. Plus, you'll have a great product and can write it off on your taxes!

I just read something about how listings that had photos taken with digital SLR cameras sold for more than listings that had pictures taken with a cheap point-and-shoot camera (there's a summary HERE). Bear in mind that correlation does not imply causation, since agents who list higher-end properties are probably more likely to use higher-end technology, thereby skewing the results.

That said, having exceptional photos WILL draw more potential buyers to your listings. Obviously, I would at least preview all properties that seemed to meet my clients' criteria regardless of the quality of the photos, but I do know that photo quality did make an impression when I was shopping for my own house several years back.

I do know people who hire the pros, especially for expensive listings or properties that are architecturally unique...but in the long run the most financially reasonable approach is to get the right equipment and software--AND TRAINING--to do it yourself. I can't emphasize "AND TRAINING" enough; having thousands of dollars' worth of equipment and photo software is worthless if you don't know how to use it to its full potential.

Oh, one other non-monetary benefit as well...my vacation photos are much more snazzy than they used to be back when I had cheap equipment and couldn't use Photoshop.

I take all my photos myself. I invested over $1,000 (chump change for real photographers, ha ha) in a digital SLR and ultra-wide angle lens. I also have what is similar to Photoshop (the old, awesome Paint Shop Pro, before Corel acquired it and RUINED it) to do my editing.

It helps that I am a bit of an amateur photographer - but it's not hard to learn how to take good photos if you take the time to study and practice. When it comes to real estate photography it is definitely a learned skill more than anything - learning how to best capture a room, an angle, an exterior...plus looking for the right "detail" shot (not all "detail" shots should be published.)

Real estate photography is not just knowing how to take pictures but what ones to skip...what pictures do the house justice and what ones make the property look less attractive than it actually is (such as most bathroom shots - sometimes no photo is better than a photo that just does NOT show a room in its best light...)

PLEASE NOTE I am not advocating being dishonest - not at all - but some photos just do NOT do the property justice and should be sent to the recycle bin.

And never, ever, should photo editing EVER change a material fact about the property (i.e., removing power lines, pasting shrubs over neighbor's houses, removing fire hydrants, etc.)

Thanks everyone for the great advice! I'm well versed in photography and proficient in Photoshop and Paint Shop Pro (old BETTER version - you are so right Perky!), but I do need to invest in higher-end equipment - oh darn :grin:

Sounds like it just makes sense to do it myself and invest the time and money.

Great discussion! You guys are the best.

Joe

If it is cost effective to use a professional photographer or not depends on too many factors to give a blanket yes or no. A pro can run anywhere between $55 and $400 or more depending on the photographer, the area, size of the property, etc. Good photography equipment, software and computer equipment will run you between $3000 and $5000. Prorating that over 3 years at 12 listing per year, means equipment cost will run $85 and $140 per property not including your labor.

The comments above on shooting real estate requiring experience are correct. But shooting 2 or 3 properties a month won't cut it. Shooting 2 or 3 a DAY it what you need. You can volunteer to shoot other agent's properties to get experience. Be sure to include that time cost to the above equipment costs.

Processing the photo afterward can easily take more time that shooting the photos. If you are not familiar with the software it will take you twice as long.

In general you will get much better photos and get the photos quicker from a professional than you can get on your own. Plus you can spend your time selling property or following up on leads instead of sitting in front of a camera or computer.

Last, you can also take photography service off your taxes. It falls under advertising.

Thanks Neal! Also some very good points worth considering.

I think you meant that it can expensed, or deducted from your Gross Income, before calculating your taxes. There's a big difference.

My brother is a professional photographer so I do use him for most of my high dollar listings but the simple truth is the technology of cameras today is light years ahead of where it was even 5 years ago.

Nowadays, 10 mega pixels (mega pixels make up the size and over all 'quality' of the pictures the camera takes) are standard in most medium end cameras. In fact, few 'low end' cameras are even out on the market anymore - heck even cell phones are increasing their quality all the time.. The standard of quality is getting higher and higher.

Most digital SLR's will take stunning pictures (certainly good enough for the web) using nothing more than their 'auto' feature where all you have to do is point and shoot. Very little retouching (if any) is even needed if you just play around with the camera a little and learn the basic do's and dont's of basic lighting.

What I have found, especially in today's market is that good photos are a must, but 'pro' photos not as important as getting as much info as you can quickly cause the average first attention span to a listing for an online viewer is only about 20 seconds (for text and photos)

One little trick that I use often is to simply hold a video camera out in front of me and do a quick little vid introducing the property and some quick key points (such as if the property has an amazing view).

I have found that more interest arises out of my 20 second video than looking at a dozen pictures. Not saying I don't use pics, cause I do, but I'm saying the vid helps out tremendously for a quick attention glance to the listing. As long as you don't have 'bad' photography of your listing, I think 'good' photos are about as effective as 'pro' photos and retouching should be something that you do if you 'have to' not as a regular practice.

Remember that the attention time you are going to get from a user is going to be very small - so try to get your main sales point of the property over visually as quickly as possible. Focus on making sure the picture you pick for the main photo is the right one and the best one. It is not always just because it is the main front angle shot of the property. Sometimes, a backyard, balcony, or even a bathroom shot is the 'winning' main photo.

Make sure to TALK TO YOUR CUSTOMERS! Ask people who contact you what brought them to you - what stood out on the listing, and what you could have done better for the listing in their opinion. Your customers are the best source for determining what is the best way to sell to them.

The number of megapixels has less to do with the quality of a photo than you think. It is only a measure of the potential resolution of the camera. Other factors have as much or more effect on the photo quality. Len quality, focal lenght, lighting, angle, prespective, etc are very important to the final product. Point and shoot cameras tend to have small, lower quality lens with very short focal lenghts. They are great if you want a compact camera to take your typical vacation photo. They are not suitable for real estate photos.

Video is great for real estate if done right. It is better when used with photos. Each has their own strength and weaknesses.

True - some of my best shots were taken w/ my 2.1 mp camera. Until of course I tried to enlarge them past 5x7 for prints.

For our purposes all the mp count really does is just boost the file size! LOL

For a good agent, your 1 listing per month estimate is way too low. So the cost of a rig is really more like $40/listing assuming a 5 year life for the hardware. Plus you can "section 179" it right off your income. Plus you have total flexibility and can reshoot whenever and wherever you need to. However, the other advantages totally tip the balance in favor of doing it yourself. Having a killer rig is actually a listing tool that helps me get listings. I bring the rig to the LP and wow them right off the bat. If the hardware gets you even 1 listing in my area, it pays for itself straight away.

Furthermore, once you get good with your rig, you are really fast and efficient just like a pro. I can size up a scene through the viewfinder and pretty much hit my settings in a flash. Experience makes you quick as well as good.

Finally, it's just fun and I don't care how much the gear costs.

Also, if you're clueless about photography, I would also recommend taking a one-day class at your local Junior College. I've taken two of these, and they're generally quite good. There are lot of issues with understanding light and proper framing that the average person doesn't realize, so with just a little bit of instruction and a good camera (which are becoming cheaper and cheaper), you'll save yourself a lot of money in the long run.

Good advice! Photography really is a learned skill.

Yes, to be a photographic "artist" requires innate talent and eye for design along with learned skills, but for real estate purposes, it's more skill than art.

Navarac, do you have special lighting equipment? Would you mind sharing what you use?

I plan on investing some more in 2011 for better equipment. My lens, camera, and software are great but I need more...I want to have brighter corners and eliminate that circular shadow on the floor when I shoot at 10mm w/ flash - I know I need a better flash for wide angle. Probably should be the first thing I get, huh? (Sheepishly admits to using the on-board camera flash...gulp...don't hate me...)

Perky,
I have not looked at any of your photos, but if the corners of the photos are always dark it could be len vignetting. A better flash will not resolve the issue. Instead you will need to either adjust the zoom or post process the photos to lighten the corners. If you want a good flash, most of the upper end Cannon flashes are good. You can also visit the Quantum site it you want a really good flash. (They also have some rechargeable battery packs that will attach to other flashes. I suggest you look into one)

As for getting as fast as a pro, most photographers will shoot more properties in a day than most agents will list in a week (or month). So as an agent you are not going to get the experience level of a pro.

Both equipment and photography services can be expensed. So there is not an advantage either way from that aspect.

While showing up with a nice photography rig may wow the clients, so does telling them that you use a professional real estate photographer. Plus, it's a great deal easier to WOW them with a pro photographer in your personnel advertising. Personally, I would rather an agent be out there working on leads to sell my house than taking photos.

Last - if it was really so easy, why are there so many poor real estate photos?

No, they're not always dark. It's when I'm trying to do a wide shot of a large room and there is not sufficient available light.

There is a vignette that I do get when I try to use the flash with my 10mm zoom set at 10mm...it's a dark semi circle at the bottom of every photo. It is not there when I do not use flash - only when I use the flash.

Actually I get the vignette when my lens is 14mm or under...not just at 10mm

The dark circle when using the flash is a flash shadow not vignetting.

I'm going to assume you are not seeing the dark corners at above 14mm. This is classic vignetting. As you zoom out (wider view), more of the fringe areas are in the photo. There are several good programs that will remove this from the photo based on your lens and focal lens. I suggest PTlens, here is a link http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/. They also have a good example of vignetting on the examples page.

thanks neal.

the flash shadow would be taken care of by a specialized flash for wide angle, correct? I seem to recall that in the past...way back when I worked at the photographer's studio...I used to take freelance photos of groups of people at a resort, and my boss told me I needed a different flash if I was going to use the wide angle lens. but maybe memory is failing me...

No, the shadow will be taken care of by positioning the flash so that the shadow of the lens doesn't fall into the photo. Moving the flash up and forward will fix the problem. (in other words, don't use the flash build into the camera).

As for a specialized flash for wide angle: Many flashes with a good diffuser will handle a wide angle lens. The key is to make sure the flash has enough power. A flash for a wide angle lens must cover more area than one for a standard lens. That why I suggested the battery pack earlier.

Multiple wireless flash units is the key to lighting a large room. The camera syncs with these so when you shoot, all the flash units go off. This reduces or eliminates the effect of lens vignetting. It also produces a fantastic photo.

However, if you don't want to invest in multiple flash units and the wireless transmitter, you can use the vignette correction in Photoshop. It reduces it nicely and is a perfectly acceptable alternative.

That is why it is good to invest in a full-featured program like Photoshop CS4. It simply does everything.

No, saying you use a pro does NOT compete with walking in with your rig and shooting some sample photos right on the spot. And demonstrating HDR right in their living room. So unless you plan to bring your pro photographer to the LP, you will not get the WOW factor of the in-house demo.

And while a pro will be faster than an amateur in shooting under a wide variety of indoor and outdoor conditions, a pro will not necessarily be faster at shooting the inside of a residential dwelling, something that I do ALL the time. Within this niche, I am as fast as a pro.

As for your last point, I never said it was easy. It is NOT easy. But it is fun and a good agent should be a good photographer. Using a pro is actually ridiculous. It is extra time, an extra trip, an extra imposition on the seller, and you cannot control what you end up getting. What if you do not like the angle the pro used for 2 or 3 rooms. Are you going to have him go back? Or go back yourself and take a few photos yourself to supplement his? If you're going to do that, why bother? Just DIY. And what happens after the seller repaints the living room? You are going to call the pro to go back and shoot another picture?

No, it's just much better to invest the money, time and effort to take care of this stuff yourself. Plus it is also a creative outlet. Plus it helps you get listings. Plus today's higher end cameras shoot hi-def video, so you can supplement your photography with some nice videography in spots. Plus you get to have great equipment to shoot family stuff, and the know-how to make it look great. Plus it's a big fat tax deduction. Plus the gear gets old and you get to go out and buy more! Awesome!

Navarac, sorry I will have to disagree. I have seen first hand time and time again where agents were contacted specifically because they used a pro. This is not just a sporadic listing here and there, it is a steady repeating trend. I'm glad the bringing the equipment to the LP works for you. But, that is late in the game and many sellers will have already made a decision. Using a pro is something that can WOW a potential client before you even meet.

Part of your argument is based on extra trips, extra time, imposition the seller... None of which is correct. Pro photographers can and do have access to the same lock-box system as agents. In most cases the shoots are scheduled directly with the owners and done while they are at work. A business card is left so that the owner knows the house was photographed. Neither the owner or agent needs to be present. So the imposition on the seller is zero. Also, since few sellers have the home in photo condition at the LP, this actually saves the agent an additional trip to the property.

As for bad angles; a pro real estate photographer will take nothing but real estate photos. For 6 to 10 hours a day, 5 to 6 days a week, 50+ weeks a year they are shooting real estate. Over a year they will shoot hundreds if not thousands of properties. They will know better than an agent how to photograph a room to make it look it's best. Plus they will take the room from more than one angle, so you will have several photo to choose from. If none of them work, yes you do have them go back. (Same as if your photos didn't work)

You appear to enjoy photography and find it to be a creative outlet. It's great that it works for you. Some agents do a great job of photography. But for most agents, it doesn't work that way. Proof can be easily found in the photos posted to MLS boards across the country. Unfortunately, many are unaware of the poor quality of their photos. In other cases, the agents choose to spend thier time working with potential buyers and showing properties, or working on leads then to spend hours taking and processing photos.

This is assuming one lives in an area where there are real estate photographers handy. I certainly do not live in such an area. The pro-photographers around here are all studio portrait and wedding photographers.

Try to keep that in mind. City dwellers tend to forget that their more rural counterparts often do have to rely on themselves for nearly everything.

So giving a glib "Hire a pro, it's easier and better" answer may be suitable for certain areas, but not for all.

For what I do it really doesn't matter.

Take a few pics with digital camera upload and go.

In commercial real estate buyers don't purchase on emotion or A LOOK. They purchase on the numbers of a property and perform their own due diligence.

You can have amazing pictures but if you are overpriced it won't sell.You can have a great price and many buyers will overlook everything else to get a deal.

It is also IN MY OPINION a waste of time to use trickery to produce a photo of a property that is not realistic for what it really looks like.

All that will happen is you will create FALSE INTEREST and they will leave upon seeing the property.

Sellers of commercial properties like to hide or puff the true numbers.I tell them I will not list the property unless we are honest and put everything out there.They don't want to do this because of the lower price it will draw.

What they fail to realize is it will go under contract at a higher price and once they find out all their little secrets the buyer will get a price reduction or they will walk.So my investors know when I submit them a property I have listed the numbers are real.

They still perform their own due diligence and trust nobody but they know most deals I bring will be valid whereas another commercial broker will have multiple listings that are misrepresented junk.

Photography is ok but I make much more money per hour sticking to taking listings and negotiating contracts and getting those to closing.

Just so you know, enhancing a photo to make it look its best is not trickery. Sharpening an image, boosting contrast and saturation, correcting "blown out" window images, and using wide angle lenses are actually a part of making it appear "as it truly is" rather than as interpreted by a machine without a brain.

The camera does NOT show things the way we see them because it can NOT interpret images and light they way our eyes and brain do. A typical camera does NOT see the same things we see because the camera lens is not as wide as our eyes (i.e., does not include peripheral vision....) Our eyes can take shadowy ares and still see what is there, whereas the camera sees only shadows...

Sometimes the camera exposes the scene exactly as it appears but often times it does not. If you don't believe me re: the wide angle lens part, simply look at a particular scene - then take a picture with your standard lens, and then print it - then stand in the same spot and compare what you see (including your peripheral vision!!) with what is printed. The print is amazingly narrow!

When you are in a room and see the windows, do you see scenery outside the windows or do you see a bright glow like a nuclear bomb went off? Cameras can not process high contrast situations like our eyes and brains can...which is why so many interior shots straight out of the camera have that "window blow out" when the camera is set to properly expose for the room but not the windows. Our brain is amazing! It can take all of these impulses and correctly interpret them, whereas a camera can NOT.

It is not trickery to sharpen an image, lighten shadows, and correct color. Just sayin'.

[quote=Perky_REALTOR]And never, ever, should photo editing EVER change a material fact about the property (i.e., removing power lines, pasting shrubs over neighbor's houses, removing fire hydrants, etc.) [/quote]

How about making dead grass green with Photoshop? ;)

I really don't think that is any different than using a great spring photo while the grass really WAS green! (Assuming it's not always dead!)

I don't do that because it looks worse than leaving it alone and then it looks like you're trying to hide something else and then all of your pictures will be called into question...

Now, I might use the clone feature to get rid of a distraction that is not a permanent part of the landscape - such as a stray leaf or a piece of litter...

Well, I had litter in a photo of a different type a couple days ago. Sometimes I think I am so focused on getting the shot that I fail to see other things that should be seen. When I put that particular shot on the computer I was astonished to see the carcass of a very large deer in the foreground of my picture. Fortunately, this was for a BPO and not a listing. A tight crop got rid of the carcass.

ROFL!!! I have shown 2 different properties and found dead deer in the yard! Both of them had been there so long they were skeletons. Fortunately, it was different buyers each time.

"Guess the owner hasn't been here in a while, huh?"

"'Fraid not...."

LOL

That's awesome. Considering some of the neighborhoods in my farm area, I'm wondering how long it's going to be until I actually find a human body at a showing. :-\

I came across another agent's listing in a more "urban" area the other day; in the center of the main photo was someone passed out on the sidewalk right in front of the unit. I'm hoping he wasn't so permanent a fixture that it would've been inappropriate to crop him out.

ROFL Andy...

This photographer needed to use a wide angle lense to showcase the home a little better

YOU ARE SO RIGHT NAVARAC!!

I actually LOVE photography! and eventually I will get my professional camera! (I'm a newbie in real estate). :)

ha ha ha ha ha

there used to be a blog for bad mls photos but the guy stopped doing it. there's a facebook group devoted to it

Perky, I remember seeing a website of bad pictures. It was hysterical and I shared with my office mates. I think the guy was in Canada. Share the FB link.

LOL, a wide angle lens seems to be the least of his worries.

Here is the Facebook group:

Really Bad MLS Photos

In case you're a glutton for punishment:

Bad MLS Photos Blog

Just joined. Great. Nice time laughing. Thanks Perky.

Like my fridge? ROFL

Hello all,

I am new here so bare with me if I don't post properly. I am a photographer, and although I am not trying to solicit any business here, I must say that a pro photographer is by far better. They have pro gear, all the software, and a good eye. I have seen way too many bad photos on mls sites, and corporate web sites. I am sure that allot of you care deeply about your trade, but allot of Agents don't, and that is were I come in. Saving people time, and at a low price, money as well.

Thanks Guys

ps also trying to get enough business as well to get into Virtual tours.

Well let's see. My rig includes a Canon EOS 5D2, "L" glass 16-35mm zoom, Adobe Creative Suite Master Collection 5, a steadicam for videos, and specialized programs for focus stacking and high dynamic range stacking, as well as Avid Media Composer 5 for editing and post.

So I do not believe you do a better job than I do. Just sayin...

Many of us that hang out here are tech geeks and have the nice toys for photos & video. We just enjoy the camera phone agents with foggy lenses and no flash. Makes us look better..

I don't trust anyone as a professional who doesn't know that "allot" is not the word to use in this context.

It should be "a lot."

A solid grasp of basic grammar and simple vocabulary gives me a good idea of how "professional" someone truly is. Not paying attention to details such as that makes me wonder what other details will be missed or dismissed as not important...

Oh, and I don't even know you, so I am NOT going to go bare with you, or anyone else on this forum. I'm a married lady and I have morals!

You go Girl !

LOL. Sorry, I lost control.

He's Canadian. Maybe "allot" is like "neighbour."

No, it's not. It is a completely different word.

transitive verb
1
: to assign as a share or portion <allot 10 minutes for the speech>
2
: to distribute by or as if by lot <allot seats to the press>
— al·lot·ter noun

Neighbour is simply an alternate spelling.

Bare and bear are two different words as well that have completely different meanings. This is elementary-level English.

It's allot of fun following this.

Ha ha, very funny. LOL

I was just being sarcasmic.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, the proper use of grammar and the English language in general is quickly being left by the wayside. When I browse the MLS, I am constantly amazed at how many people were able to pass their licensing exam.

If I was a client and saw the misspellings and poor sentence structure of my agent I would be appalled ... and on the phone cancelling my contract.

I know. I am constantly appalled when I read my local newspaper online. The other day I read a story about a prominent local figure who passed away and "left a big whole in the community."

*facepalm*

I wonder: why did I even try to pass English? It seems that I went through that hell for nothing, because like Algebra, I don't need it. LOL