Real Estate

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

Compared to his real work? Yeah, actually.

And the funniest part is that I believe that photo is from one free pieces Fstoppers pub'd to sell his tutorial. Didn't it take like 3+ hours and over 100 shots to make? Lmao. So a professional takes hours, likely hundreds of dollars of accessories (prob into thousands) and untold amount of talent and skill with photoshop...

Once again, and I repeat...the business is not being infiltrated by run of the mill realtors. Not sure what you're so upset about.

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

Yup...found it...hahaha

How many pocket wizards and SB80s? Lolz.

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
Compared to his real work? Yeah, actually.

And the funniest part is that I believe that photo is from one free pieces Fstoppers pub'd to sell his tutorial. Didn't it take like 3+ hours and over 100 shots to make? Lmao. So a professional takes hours, likely hundreds of dollars of accessories (prob into thousands) and untold amount of talent and skill with photoshop...

Once again, and I repeat...the business is not being infiltrated by run of the mill realtors. Not sure what you're so upset about.

That was his real work. That was an actual client of his that was selling their home. How professional of you to publically run down another professional in a public forum. Obviously it's good enough for his website because it's right there with all of his other work. It wasn't a free publicity piece. It was actually in his first tutorial where he laid that shot out step by step using a sub $600 camera. When did the discussion turn to realtors getting into this business? It was my understanding that the OP wasn't a realtor, but someone looking to get into RE photography. Most realtors can't even market their own listings correctly much less photograph them correctly.

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
Compared to his real work? Yeah, actually.

And the funniest part is that I believe that photo is from one free pieces Fstoppers pub'd to sell his tutorial. Didn't it take like 3+ hours and over 100 shots to make? Lmao. So a professional takes hours, likely hundreds of dollars of accessories (prob into thousands) and untold amount of talent and skill with photoshop...

Once again, and I repeat...the business is not being infiltrated by run of the mill realtors. Not sure what you're so upset about.

http://www.mpkelley.com/gallery/
GALLERY

They say to only put your best work on your portfolio page.

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

The discussion always included realtors, being well, a thread about real estate and multiple people bringing them up. My argument is that they're too cheap to either take on the task or hire people with the equipment and expertise to do the job properly, which I repeatedly backed up, with examples. You came in trying to make a point that you can take good photos with cheaper equipment, which isn't a counter to any argument. Then you provided an example that literally solidified my point that results are skill driven, and a certain level of equipment is needed.

Only used one speedlight..with pocket wizard...and camranger... That's also a nice gear head he's got there.

And "running down"? Wtf does that even mean? I was also referring to the free video that I posted that was an ad for his tut, on fstoppers...

Robert Weaver said:
GALLERY

They say to only put your best work on your portfolio page.

Or when you're selling a $299 tutorial...lol...

The discussion always included realtors, being well, a thread about real estate and multiple people bringing them up. My argument is that they're too cheap to either take on the task or hire people with the equipment and expertise to do the job properly, which I repeatedly backed up, with examples. You came in trying to make a point that you can take good photos with cheaper equipment, which isn't a counter to any argument I made. Then you provided an example that literally solidified my point that results are skill driven, and a certain level of equipment is needed.

Only used one speedlight..with pocket wizard...and camranger... That's also a nice gear head he's got there.

And "running down"? Wtf does that even mean? I was also referring to the free video that I posted that was an ad for his tut, on fstoppers...

GG

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
Yup...found it...hahaha

How many pocket wizards and SB80s? Lolz.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

And you do realize that the shot he did with similar equipment can be had for right at a grand? There are plenty of cheaper options with speedlights with built in triggers now. They weren't as readily available when he made this video.

Canon T1i w/ kit lens - $220
Manfrotto Tripod - $167
Manfrotto Monopod with flash bracket - $70
Camranger - $250
Flashpoint Li ION R2 manual speedlight with remote trigger -$150
iPod touch - $180 (If you don't have a smartphone)

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

Robert Weaver said:
And you do realize that the shot he did with similar equipment can be had for right at a grand? There are plenty of cheaper options with speedlights with built in triggers now. They weren't as readily available when he made this video.

Canon T1i w/ kit lens - $220
Manfrotto Tripod - $167
Manfrotto Monopod with flash bracket - $70
Camranger - $250
Flashpoint Li ION R2 manual speedlight with remote trigger -$150
iPod touch - $180 (If you don't have a smartphone)

And he could've taken a wonderful photo (probably close to this) handheld, with an iPhone 7 shooting raw, and 10 minutes in light room using HDR...what's your point? I feel like Alice in Wonderland...

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
You came in trying to make a point that you can take good photos with cheaper equipment, which isn't a counter to any argument. Then you provided an example that literally solidified my point that results are skill driven, and a certain level of equipment is needed.

Novum Dives said:
Anyway, if you think regular, run of the mill realtors are getting into this, you're mistaken.

- A decent DSLR is $1300+ at the lowest end, body only. The Canon T6/Nikon D3300 type models are not worth it. Yes they're DSLRs and can take lenses, but they're for beginners in photography getting their feet wet. They don't have the sensor sizes and dynamic range to get the really detailed photos you'd want as a pro.

The T6/Nikon D3300 are perfectly suited for static object photography especially when you are running ISO between 100-400.

Novum Dives said:
I'm saying a pro wouldn't be using them, so if you're running a biz, get the right gear.

Well, there are pro's out there doing just that. They don't want to wear out a $3K body for run of the mill RE work.

Wayne Capili with Interface Visual
Wayne Capili’s Sony A6000 Epiphany
Rich Baum in Sacramento CA

Both of these guys are professional full time photographers that use the a6000 for real estate. You don't know what you are talking about. If you are a smart business person you will learn when and when not to use your best equipment. That's like buying a BMW and running the wheels off the thing in two years. It's a total waste of resources. A lesser vehicle will get the job done, but at a lesser cost.

Novum Dives said:
The added complexity and terrible kit lenses make for worse shots than if they had just used a decent point and shoot. )

A low end DSLR with a kit lens is still far superior to any P&S. Just like moving down to a cell phone It doesn't get any better. I would say that auto mode on a DSLR will give you a "better" picture due to having a larger sensor and larger lens to gather light with.

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

Robert Weaver said:
The T6/Nikon D3300 are perfectly suited for static object photography especially when you are running ISO between 100-400.

Well, there are pro's out there doing just that. They don't want to wear out a $3K body for run of the mill RE work.

Wayne Capili with Interface Visual
Wayne Capili’s Sony A6000 Epiphany
Rich Baum in Sacramento CA

Both of these guys are professional full time photographers that use the a6000 for real estate. You don't know what you are talking about. If you are a smart business person you will learn when and when not to use your best equipment. That's like buying a BMW and running the wheels off the thing in two years. It's a total waste of resources. A lesser vehicle will get the job done, but at a lesser cost.

A low end DSLR with a kit lens is still far superior to any P&S. Just like moving down to a cell phone It doesn't get any better. I would say that auto mode on a DSLR will give you a "better" picture due to having a larger sensor and larger lens to gather light with.

So you found 2 guys lmao...
Wear out a body? You must be kidding...

Running the wheels off a BMW in 2 years? What are you talking about? The car analogy makes no sense. A smart business person uses the best equipment that produces the best results for them. A beginner couldn't get the results of any of the people you posted. Which, ironically, isn't and was never the point of my original statement. My point is that the barrier to entry to produce solid results is to high for people that are not doing it as professionals, in this business, like realtors.

Your last sentence is opinion...so, uh ok? I don't agree at all. There are higher end PS fixed lens units out there (and becoming more popular) that area lot more approachable that low end DSLRs. I'd take an RX100 ANY DAY OF THE WEEK over a d3xxx or whatever.

Oh and have fun with your a6000 doing video...the well documented overheating issues are surely a blast to deal with.

Your entire tirade has been a non sequitur.

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
So you found 2 guys lmao...
Wear out a body? You must be kidding....

There are more that use the a6000. Those are just two of the more notable ones.

Yep, in the DSLR world it's called shutter actuation. Also there are drops, bumps and other things that can happen to bodies on the shoot.

Novum Dives said:
Running the wheels off a BMW in 2 years? What are you talking about? The car analogy makes no sense. A smart business person uses the best equipment that produces the best results for them. A beginner couldn't get the results of any of the people you posted. Which, ironically, isn't and was never the point of my original statement. My point is that the barrier to entry to produce solid results is to high for people that are not doing it as professionals, in this business, like realtors.

For real estate purposes it would be foolish to go out and buy the flagship FF Nikon/Canon/Sony body to just do real estate when in fact their lower tier FF and even crop sensor cameras will produce the same result as the flagship bodies for RE purposes. There will be not much in noticeable differences in the quality of output. You would be spending thousands more for little to no gain. It really has more to do with the glass than it does the body anyway. A smart business person is going to watch their bottom line and spend the least amount they can while remaining viable. You are wrong about the bar being too high. I'm still using a crop sensor as the cost to go FF just isn't justifiable right now. If you really want to go all out then you need to move to the larger formats.

Novum Dives said:
Your last sentence is opinion...so, uh ok? I don't agree at all. There are higher end PS fixed lens units out there (and becoming more popular) that area lot more approachable that low end DSLRs. I'd take an RX100 ANY DAY OF THE WEEK over a d3xxx or whatever.

So you would take a fixed lens camera with a 1" sensor over a D3300 which you can put very high quality glass on??? Oh and the sensor on the D3300 is still twice as large as the RX100. Your comment about the RX100 further shows your ignorance on the matter.

Novum Dives said:
Oh and have fun with your a6000 doing video...the well documented overheating issues are surely a blast to deal with.

Your entire tirade has been a non sequitur.

Who said anything about doing video with the a6000 anyway? Who cares.

Your entire conversation has only shown you know nothing about what you are talking about. I've already called out your inconsistency.

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

There are more that use the a6000. Those are just two of the more notable ones.

K.

Yep, in the DSLR world it's called shutter actuation. Also there are drops, bumps and other things that can happen to bodies on the shoot.

My weather sealed magnesium body d500 will be fine...

For real estate purposes it would be foolish to go out and buy the flagship FF Nikon/Canon/Sony body to just do real estate when in fact their lower tier FF and even crop sensor cameras will produce the same result as the flagship bodies for RE purposes. There will be not much in noticeable differences in the quality of output. You would be spending thousands more for little to no gain. It really has more to do with the glass than it does the body anyway. A smart business person is going to watch their bottom line and spend the least amount they can while remaining viable. You are wrong about the bar being too high. I'm still using a crop sensor as the cost to go FF just isn't justifiable right now. If you really want to go all out then you need to move to the larger formats.

I never said anything about crop vs. FF...and I said from the jump I personally use a d500. Lol.

So you would take a fixed lens camera with a 1" sensor over a D3300 which you can put very high quality glass on??? Oh and the sensor on the D3300 is still twice as large as the RX100. Your comment about the RX100 further shows your ignorance on the matter.

Again, reading is key. You're running in circles...now you're talking about putting high quality glass on a 3300? How much does that cost, pray tell? So, yes, I would absolutely take a RX100 over a d3300 stock/kit any day. And forget about decent video on a 3300.

Who said anything about doing video with the a6000 anyway? Who cares.

Video was part of my original statement. You're on a drone forum. Have you noticed? Reading is hard, I know.

Your entire conversation has only shown you know nothing about what you are talking about. I've already called out your inconsistency.

I dismantled every point you've made, which is hilarious because you never even addressed the core contention of the thread. Pointing out that "you can take pictures cheaper" is meaningless. If the bar isn't too high, then where are all the new real estate media producers coming from the ranks of realtors or novices putting out high end content? Send me links to the portfolios of the mass of people doing commercial RE photography and videography.

I'll wait here.

BTW do you have a RE license and part 107 cert?

Robert Weaver · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
K.
My weather sealed magnesium body d500 will be fine...

Are your lenses weather sealed? If they are not then you camera isn't technically fully weather sealed and the most vulnerable part of the camera is still exposed.

Novum Dives said:
K.
I never said anything about crop vs. FF...and I said from the jump I personally use a d500. Lol.

Novum Dives said:
K.
Again, reading is key. You're running in circles...now you're talking about putting high quality glass on a 3300? How much does that cost, pray tell? So, yes, I would absolutely take a RX100 over a d3300 stock/kit any day. And forget about decent video on a 3300.

LOL! This comment really shows your ignorance on the matter. A D3300 with a kit lens will blow the RX100 away. The RX100 has a sensor half the size of the D3300.

Novum Dives said:
K.
Video was part of my original statement. You're on a drone forum. Have you noticed? Reading is hard, I know.

Novum Dives said:
K.
I dismantled every point you've made, which is hilarious because you never even addressed the core contention of the thread. Pointing out that "you can take pictures cheaper" is meaningless. If the bar isn't too high, then where are all the new real estate media producers coming from the ranks of realtors or novices putting out high end content? Send me links to the portfolios of the mass of people doing commercial RE photography and videography.

You've only dismantled your own comments by your comments. I've shown that.

Actually I have addressed the core contention of the thread.

The bar is not high at all. The market is actually flooded with RE photographers. The good photographers are smaller in number. To put out high end content it takes years of practice and patience. It also takes hard work and lots of learning and listening.

Novum Dives said:
BTW do you have a RE license and part 107 cert?

I don't have my RE license and I don't plan on getting it while doing RE photography. There are many ethical issues that can arise from having your RE license and offering professional services to realtors.

I do have my Part 107 certificate.

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

Robert Weaver said:
Are your lenses weather sealed? If they are not then you camera isn't technically fully weather sealed and the most vulnerable part of the camera is still exposed.

Was responding to :

Also there are drops, bumps and other things that can happen to bodies on the shoot.

Read better, man.

LOL! This comment really shows your ignorance on the matter. A D3300 with a kit lens will blow the RX100 away. The RX100 has a sensor half the size of the D3300.

Shows that you've never used them both. Blows away...lol. And how about video? How's that 4k oversampling on the d3300? Oh...wait...

You've only dismantled your own comments by your comments. I've shown that.

Best 2 sentences all thread. I'm saving them. Lmao.

Actually I have addressed the core contention of the thread.

The bar is not high at all. The market is actually flooded with RE photographers. The good photographers are smaller in number. To put out high end content it takes years of practice and patience. It also takes hard work and lots of learning and listening.

You literally keep making my point for me, all while failing to read the entire thread. First, I said nothing about the population of RE photographers. My contention was vis a vis a comment up thread about agents doing it themselves, and I extrapolated further into taking on the whole-media approach I outlined in my OP. That's my point...no realtor or fly by night n00b drone pilot is taking market share from real professionals. This is in part to the technical and financial barrier, but also the expertise needed to produce good content.

The main point...the question of the thread, is: Anyone done real estate video, and at what price points? Then there were comments about it being done in-house, too expensive for insurance, agents doing it themselves etc etc. Then I made my original statement.

Read, Bobby.

I don't have my RE license

That was more rhetorical, as was obvious that you don't.

and I don't plan on getting it while doing RE photography. There are many ethical issues that can arise from having your RE license and offering professional services to realtors.

Not true at all in the case of production, but if you don't understand the previous 10 points, and aren't in the agency industry, you won't understand this. If you think you'll have issues being ethical, in any business, you're right to stay away.

GG

GadgetGuy · Nov 2, 2016

Robert Weaver said:
If you don't want to market other peoples personal property properly then it may be time for those realtors to find a new profession.

I think you meant other people's real property, unless you were focusing (pun intended) on the fact that a bad iPhone real estate photo would include the owner's junk and personal property, which should be removed either before shooting, or in post, before posting!

Novum Dives · Nov 2, 2016

GadgetGuy said:
I think you meant other people's real property, unless you were focusing (pun intended) on the fact that a bad iPhone real estate photo would include the owner's junk and personal property, which should be removed either before shooting, or in post, before posting!

It's honestly amazing what people leave out when pics are taken of their house and/or it's is being shown. A real look into civilization...

GadgetGuy · Nov 2, 2016

Novum Dives said:
It's honestly amazing what people leave out when pics are taken of their house and/or it's is being shown. A real look into civilization...

At a recent Sunday Open House, the real estate agent left nude photos of the wife of the owner up on the wall for all to see!

Admittedly, they were works of art, and tastefully done, but with full frontal nudity! Not a way to sell a house, but a great way to create an admiring fan club of the owner's wife!

jlazz447 · Nov 3, 2016

the last 2 pages of camera talk and name calling were great and all but it was a bit of a digression from some of the original questions...

So what I got out of some of the comments about giving my friend aerial pictures for his resume service website is that;
1. If I purposely make a flight to take specific pictures of what he wants for his website that I would need a 107 cert.
2. BUT, If I showed him some of my old photos and videos I took for hobby purposes and he thought they'd be good for his website that I would NOT need a 107 cert.?
who determines the "intent of flight"? who checks that?

please correct me if I read those comments wrong...
Also, where is this information coming from? could someone cite the specific website/ paragraph this comes from?

AndrewinNH · Nov 3, 2016

GadgetGuy said:
Agree 1000%! Real estate agents, as a whole, are also cheap, and the majority won't spend any of their own money on a listing on spec! On the high end properties, the agent can now easily buy their own drone, get a 107 license, and permanently cut you out, for less than you need to charge to make a reasonable business profit for a single listing. Find a different business model, if you want to earn a decent living!

You can say the same about Real Estate photographers. The better agents know that they can't take professional photos so why would they think they can fly and take professional photos? In any service business model you have to deliver a service 'photo' better and more cost effective than the client "realtor" can do on they're own. Drones get expense when you crash them and or take poor images.

Robert Weaver · Nov 3, 2016

AndrewinNH said:
You can say the same about Real Estate photographers. The better agents know that they can't take professional photos so why would they think they can fly and take professional photos? In any service business model you have to deliver a service 'photo' better and more cost effective than the client "realtor" can do on they're own. Drones get expense when you crash them and or take poor images.

The better agents also know that they are best and most effective when signing listing agreements rather than wasting time trying to photograph a home. It takes time to properly photography a home. All the while they could be doing other things.