HDR, or high dynamic range photography is not unlike the process of stacking negatives.  Essentially, the goal is one of the same: combine a number of bracketed exposures in an effort to create one final image that embodies perfect tonal range.  HDR is not limited to astrophotography by any means; with new hardware and software readily available to the general public, it’s common to see images in every genre that attempt to utilize HDR processing.  Thus, it comes as no surprise that real estate photographers have taken hold of HDR – using it to create both stunning masterpieces and disastrous flops.

The perfect shooting conditions are rare, especially when it comes to real estate.  Fluffy clouds, blue skies, perfect light… these conditions come together sometimes, but not always.  So, it’s nice to have a few tricks up your sleeve that still allow you to create great photos even when your timing is off.  I stepped out the other day for instance, to shoot a photo of the Point2 building (above) only to find washed-out skies and all around ‘bad’ light.  The perfect exposure was not a possibility, and my polarizing filter did nothing to correct the hot sky. I had a tripod with me though, and shot a number of photos at varying exposures, later merging them with HDR techniques.

Here’s a few tips for shooting raw images for later HDR processing:

• Use a sturdy tripod, and a cable release or remote control so your framing remains consistent.
• Bracket your exposures by adjusting your shutter speed rather than your aperture so your depth of field does not change.
• Shoot at least three photos – one underexposed, one overexposed, and one metered correctly.  Spreading out each exposure by a couple of stops is best.
• Shooting at dusk or dawn works great, and you may want to turn on all of the house lights to create a warm, ‘homey’ feel to the final shot.  Keep an eye on varying light sources though, as interior light will appear yellow.  Alternatively, exterior light may appear blue when shooting interiors.
• Avoid shooting areas that have moving objects if possible.  It complicates the merging process.

Once you have three or more bracketed exposures, it’s just a matter of merging them into the ‘perfect’ shot using specialized computer software.  Here’s where things can get tricky, but once you find a system that works for you it becomes much quicker and easier.  When it comes to HDR, practice truly does makes perfect – so don’t expect to master it on your first try.

Keep in mind that the best HDR images tend to be those that appear vibrant, colorful, and clear, while retaining realistic and natural tones.  Unnatural HDR images are everywhere, and there are a number of people who love them as an type of photographic art.  For real estate purposes especially, it’s very important that your images retain their realistic and natural appeal.  After all, you’re using them to sell houses not to win art competitions.  Here’s an example of an unnatural-looking HDR image:

Just because you’re using software designed to create HDR images, doesn’t mean that it’s always correct.  Color and tone can become skewed in the processing stages – sometimes to a point where they can’t be saved.  Just learn to trust your eye.

There’s a growing mass of software solutions that allow you to merge photos for the purposes of HDR.  The most popular is Adobe Photoshop which allows for both automated and manual processes.  Other common solutions include Photomatix, EasyHDR and PTgui Pro.  PTgui Pro also provides photo-stitching solutions for panoramas, and 360-degree virtual tours.  Free solutions include:  Enfuse Gui (PC), xFuse (mac), and Hugin (both).

Countless tutorials are on the web for those looking to get started.  Here’s a few decent one’s I’ve come across:

Adobe Photoshop: Automated Process |  Manual Process
Photomatix : Tutorial on Abduzeedo
PTgui Pro: Tutorial from PTgui Site

Personally, I like to merge photos manually with Photoshop.  It takes more time, but it always looks more natural in the end.  I have tested both Photomatix and PTgui Pro though, and I find Photomatix best for automated HDR processing and manual tone mapping.  Almost all of the paid solutions offer free trials, so I suggest testing as many of them as possible before making your final decision.  In the mean time, have a peek at some real estate HDR samples on PFRE’s Flickr page.  Enjoy!

If you tend to avoid using additional lighting in your setup, or you own a camera that doesn’t allow for external flashes to be connected, just be aware of a common problem that may result.  The problem is contrasting light sources, which leads to your camera being unable to properly white balance itself.  For instance, a photo of the living room that is lit with interior light (3000° Kelvin), as well as sunlight (6000° Kelvin).  I’ve seen hundreds, if not thousands of listing photos that suffer from this problem, and once you know how to spot it you’ll see for yourself.  A photo that suffers from this discoloration will appear quite yellow within the interior areas, and blue within the exterior or window areas.  The color is directly related to the Kelvin temperature of each light source.

To correct this problem, you’ll need to spend a few minutes editing the photo in a program like Adobe Photoshop.  Alternatively you can use free image editors available online like The Gimp or Paint.net although the layout and setup will differ slightly.  I’ll guide you through the process – just keep in mind that each photo will differ in its specific needs.  The more time you spend perfecting your photos in an image editor, the more aware you will become of what exactly needs to be done.

1) Open the file that appears color inaccurate. (In Photoshop, select FILE, OPEN, and track down the file from it’s saved location).

2) Desaturate the yellow channel, and increase the lightness. (In Photoshop, select IMAGE, ADJUSTMENTS, HUE/SATURATION).  Next to EDIT:, drop down the menu and select YELLOWS.  Drag the saturation down and the lightness up, but be careful not to remove too much as there may be other yellow items that need to retain their color.  Depending on the photograph, you may also need to desaturate the REDS.  The settings will vary between photos.

3) Desaturate the blue channel, and increase the lightness. As the window still appears cool and blue – repeat the same steps as #2, but select BLUES and/or CYANS from the drop down menu and make the adjustments.  Again, each image will vary in its specific settings.

4) Adjust the levels. Flashless interior photos are commonly underexposed and will appear dark and gloomy as a result. (In Photoshop, select IMAGE, ADJUSTMENTS, LEVELS).  A histogram will appear, along with a toggle bar with three points on it: one for light, mid, and dark tones.  Increase the mid-tones, and lights so the image appears more bright and vibrant – be careful not to blow out your highlights.  You may need to pull down your darks to retain shadow contrast.  Exact positions will vary between photographs.

5) Make the final color adjustments. (In Photoshop, select IMAGE, ADJUSTMENTS, COLOR BALANCE).  You will now be able to modify the red, green and blue color channels.  Please note that when balancing color, you can only add more of one color by removing another.  For instance, you can only add blue by removing yellow.  The toggles will indicate on each side the colors that oppose each other.  The yellow-blue toggle is mainly used in situations like these because that is the color temperature of each light source.  You may choose to warm up (add yellow) or cool down (add blue) your image to suit your tastes.  The highlights, mid-tones and shadows can be fine-tuned separately.  Use this time to make any other final adjustments to your image.

So this is one of many methods for how to color correct a photo.  Each person will differ slightly in his/her tastes.  Personally, I like to saturate the color of my exterior photos (i.e. vibrant greens and blues), but keep my interiors clean, bright and lowly saturated.  For more advanced users, you may also choose to custom select areas for more precise color modifications, sharpen the image, apply a noise-reduction filter, and/or crop the photo if required.

]]> http://point2agentblog.com/2009/03/02/editing-your-interior-photos/feed/ 3 http://point2agentblog.com/2008/10/24/how-far-is-too-far/ http://point2agentblog.com/2008/10/24/how-far-is-too-far/#comments Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:51:51 +0000 Bryan http://agent.point2.com/blog/?p=111 We’ve all heard the arguments regarding digital photo manipulation, and the varying opinions as to when it’s justified and when it’s not. For instance, we’d expect authenticity from a photo published in a tenth-grade history textbook, but we might be more lenient about a photo in a car ad. As one might assume, real estate [...]]]> We’ve all heard the arguments regarding digital photo manipulation, and the varying opinions as to when it’s justified and when it’s not. For instance, we’d expect authenticity from a photo published in a tenth-grade history textbook, but we might be more lenient about a photo in a car ad. As one might assume, real estate photography has found its place within this ongoing debate as increasing numbers of images are enhanced to gather more attention from prospective buyers online. Here’s a sample listing photo that I modified using standard image manipulation tools:

Whether the photo has been aesthetically improved or not is subjective, but the brighter colors and deeper, bolder shades very well could spur more attention in an online marketplace. Did I really do anything unethical though? I mean, the original photograph was not white balanced properly, the house was shot at an odd angle, and it was during an episode of dreary weather. Perhaps I crossed the line when I removed the cable strung out from the right-hand side of the house. Or maybe when I lightened and saturated the grass to make it look greener. Who knows? Better yet, who’s going to stop me?

I think the issue boils down to buyer expectation. If a buyer sees a “bad” photo online, then it’s easy for the agent to exceed expectations during a showing. However, the bad photo may also result in a number of prospective buyers not scheduling a viewing at all, or just dismissing the house all together. Alternatively, an overly enhanced listing photo may attract a large sum of buyers, but their expectations may not be met during a viewing of the actual property. The real challenge is to capture the property at its best – not unrealistically enhanced, or overtly poor, just naturally good. I end with a quote:

In the very beginning, when the operator controls and regulates his time of exposure, when in the dark room the developer is mixed for detail, breath, flatness or contrast, faking has been resorted to. In fact every photograph is a fake from start to finish.   A purely impersonal, unmanipulated photograph is practically impossible. When all is said, it still remains entirely a matter of degree and ability. – Edward Steichen, 1903 (quoted here).