Equipment recommendations for Interior/Real Estate Photography

[Adrienne]

Hi everyone, I was wondering if any of you had an opinion on gear needed for interior design/real estate photography. I am studying at the moment but this is the field I would like to go into. I have a Nikon D5000 and already have a Sigma 10-20mm.
Lighting is an issue and so far all I can tell is some speedlights. Would you recommend more than one camera?
What other lenses?
And any other peripherals that you would suggest I would really appreciate! I plan on slowly stocking up before I get started professionally.

Thanks all,
Adrienne

[I @ M]

As a minimum way to compete with the established interior design / real estate photographers ( staying with Nikon which is a wise move of course :) ) I would put together a kit comprising of a D3X (http://www.nikon.com.au/productitem.php?pid=1301-f2eb133ecb) , the 24mm (http://www.nikon.com.au/productitem.php?pid=1216-1389f369ef) and 45mm (http://www.nikon.com.au/productitem.php?pid=1247-8dc5cf61eb) PC-E lenses and 3 or more SB-900 (http://www.nikon.com.au/productitem.php?pid=1251-99a734bdd1) speedlights.

That lot should take care of around $25,000.00 and then of course you need all the expenses of any business ( insurances etc ) to just get started.

[ricktas]

I would recommend investigating the real estate photography market first. There is VERY little money to be made. Many real estate agencies are paying less than $100.00 per property, this includes travel time, costs, and editing of the photos.

However, start with what you have, the wide angle lens is something real estate agents love, as it makes room look bigger etc. Practice on your own home, get the real estate guides and look at the angles used, lighting etc and try and work out what was done, learn from looking at what is presented in real estate brochures. I suggest sticking to your study and as you learn more, you will start to learn what gear is needed, and how to take the photos to present the properties well (assuming your study is photographic, in nature).

Gear, Yes more than one camera, more than one set of batteries, get yourself liability insurance (what if you trip over something on a property and smash something?), speedlights, used off camera can be effective, so learn how to master off-camera flash, you might need a few speedlights to do it well. Understanding light and using flash effectively is not something you can learn in a week, practice, practice, practice. But for the small amount most real estate agents pay photographers, you have to seriously consider if the $$$ outlay is worth it.

[Adrienne]

Cheers Andrew and Rick...! Yes, I have learnt there are many real estate photographers around, I have an interesting road ahead of me! Ideally I would prefer to photograph for interior designers or builders and maybe fill the gaps in with real estate but I am open and really looking forward to seeing where the doors open and learning a lot!

[Kym]

On Andrew's thinking, you may as well kit up with a medium format Pentax 645D, more go for less than the D3X :)

The point being that to 'compete' in the the real estate genre is really tough and getting the best gear is going to be really expensive (don't actually do that).
This is especially true as a bunch of RE agents have a DSLR and a WA lens, then do their own work - i.e. more or less for free.

[Lanny]

Congrats on wanting to chase a passion!! So far your in the right direction of asking the questions, well done. So what equipment do you need? Start off with knowledge and understanding of RE photography, this is the best piece of equipment you will carry with you in that industry. Go onto 'You Tube', invest in books (RE Photography) speak to the people that are in RE and ask questions on what they expect from a photographer who helps market a clients property. Go onto RE sales sites and look at the images and see what style appeals to you.
I do RE photography and have made a nice little income from it as a side venture. It's a long road to travel and is sometimes lonely and time consuming. You can be at the mercy of the agent who needs/requires images by the next following day, so be flexible. The agents that you build a rapport with are gold, they will use no one except you and try and get you to shoot all their exclusive listings.
The one other piece of advice is this, there is a percentage ratio to RE photography. 10% photography, 90% business/marketing. If your prepared to accept this and really want to nail it, I am sure you will do well.
In regards to equipment, that's up to your budget and what you can afford. Your research will tell you what you need. I started off very small with great ambitions, now I have a office dedicated to the equipment that I use when doing RE photography. Good luck with it all and I hope to see some of your work. If you would like a run down of what I started with to what I have now please just give me a pm and I will be more than happy to help.

[peterb666]

Hi everyone, I was wondering if any of you had an opinion on gear needed for interior design/real estate photography. I am studying at the moment but this is the field I would like to go into. I have a Nikon D5000 and already have a Sigma 10-20mm.
Lighting is an issue and so far all I can tell is some speedlights. Would you recommend more than one camera?
What other lenses?
And any other peripherals that you would suggest I would really appreciate! I plan on slowly stocking up before I get started professionally.

Thanks all,
Adrienne

Camera and lens are perfectly fine for real estate photography. A tripod would be a must, particularly if you are going to shoot 360s shots. As for flashes, something with nice wide overage. I use a 10-24mm Nikkor (no I don't do RE photography but my father was a real estate agent many years ago), something with a nice wide angle coverage. From memory, the Nissin Di622 Mk II with the wide angle diffuser will get you about as wide coverage as possible on any flash. They cost about $160 eBay or $299 locally. For extra money with more features, you could go for a Nikon SB700 but I would expect you won't use it's potential. Where possible, a tripod with natural & the home's artificial lighting should do OK.

I am sure you could invest in a lot more kit (and more expensive kit), but this should work just fine. No use investing big if you don't have work lined up.

[Adrienne]

On Andrew's thinking, you may as well kit up with a medium format Pentax 645D, more go for less than the D3X :)

The point being that to 'compete' in the the real estate genre is really tough and getting the best gear is going to be really expensive (don't actually do that).
This is especially true as a bunch of RE agents have a DSLR and a WA lens, then do their own work - i.e. more or less for free.

Thanks Kym, good advice! I am lucky that I live in a bayside suburb and all serious agents in the area hire professionals that provide images that support the higher priced listing. I appreciate the response and I will go have a squiz at the Pentax!

Stay well!

Adrienne

[Adrienne]

Camera and lens are perfectly fine for real estate photography. A tripod would be a must, particularly if you are going to shoot 360s shots. As for flashes, something with nice wide overage. I use a 10-24mm Nikkor (no I don't do RE photography but my father was a real estate agent many years ago), something with a nice wide angle coverage. From memory, the Nissin Di622 Mk II with the wide angle diffuser will get you about as wide coverage as possible on any flash. They cost about $160 eBay or $299 locally. For extra money with more features, you could go for a Nikon SB700 but I would expect you won't use it's potential. Where possible, a tripod with natural & the home's artificial lighting should do OK.

I am sure you could invest in a lot more kit (and more expensive kit), but this should work just fine. No use investing big if you don't have work lined up.

Thanks for the advice on the lighting....Ebay has been my friend lately since I have this new photography addiction!!! Take care....

Adrienne

[JM Tran]

some weird advice in this thread.

most important thing when it comes to real estate photography for agencies are the use of rectilinear lenses, ones that do not distort (google the meaning more). The usage of high end cameras ala D3X or Pentax 645D is almost a waste of time. Agencies like Elders, LJ etc do not require enlargements at 2 or 3 meters or billboard sizes, nor do they need the dynamic range. 99% of the time the images taken will be scaled down at small sizes on brochures and net usage. Remember that the clientele here are your average income earners, not billionaires that need to be shown a high end gallery of what they are getting from a 40 million dollar home......

1. get a rectilinear lens ie a tilt shift, or cheaper like the Sigma 12-24 which is great for it too albeit at a much cheaper cost
2. get some flashes for wireless work
3. get some continuous fill light products

[I @ M]

some weird advice in this thread.



I don't see my ideas as weird advice seeing as I included the use of PC-E (tilt shift in Nikon lingo) and the D3X body would certainly be very suited to professional interior design and real estate photography. I wasn't aware that we were purely chasing low end local estate agents in the grand plans, I thought that Adrienne was aiming for the top of the tree one day so my advice was based on good equipment to use at those heights.

[JM Tran]

I don't see my ideas as weird advice seeing as I included the use of PC-E (tilt shift in Nikon lingo) and the D3X body would certainly be very suited to professional interior design and real estate photography. I wasn't aware that we were purely chasing low end local estate agents in the grand plans, I thought that Adrienne was aiming for the top of the tree one day so my advice was based on good equipment to use at those heights.

key emphasis is on 'one day' here Andrew. Can you honestly distinguish between pics taken by a D3X or a D5000 if both were processed slightly for the brochure? If and when Adrienne is at the top of the tree, the D3X will be obsolescent by then and replaced by better cameras, and the OP's demands will be different too.

I am not a proponent of buying the best now when one's skill base is not generating enough turn over to pay for it within a short amount of time yet. I also dont advocate it because if you want to buy the best now, you are really just losing out on new technology that will be readily available not long after, WHEN your skills and experience requires much more.

You do realize the top of the top real estate and commercial photographers in architecture and designs tend to use the best of the best digital large and medium format, with an army of lighting systems, easily blow over 40 or 50k.

[Xebadir]

Can see where you are both coming from, but from an entry point of view probably should be looking at a camera capable of doing the job, but not placing an overarching burden on the finances. The D5000 would not be my choice for a primary, but can understand when your starting out you have what you have. A second body would be recommended and I'd probably go a D7000 if I was sticking to Crop and a D700 if I was determined to go full frame, just bear in mind you'd need something like a 12-24 Sigma that Jackie mentioned if you intended to go full frame. The D3X/other high end is something to aim for in the long run when things are going well and you are making money, can see your point there I@M. The Sigma 10-20 is a nice enough lens on the crop body, though if you were looking for something of a little higher league the 11-16 F2.8 Tokina is well reknowned. A tilt shift would definitely be a recommended lens for this line of work, either one of the previous generation of models if your trying to save a few pennies, or one of the newer ones but it will cost a fair bit either way. The 24 PCE F3.5 is probably the most suitable, with the 45mm being an option at a later date.

With lighting its going to be critical when using wide angles, you have to get enough light to ensure there is light throughout the frame. Wireless recievers and a number of flashes (don't have to be expensive, perhaps except your main for on camera, an SB900 and a couple of SB600s, or a 3 Yongnuos with triggers) are definitely a must, and continous lighting is probably also desirable (many different options here, have an explore there are sites out there, but basically you want some reasonably rated constant globes). Given what you have I would make investing in lighting your first priority. Liability insurance is definitely an important aspect.

Above all though. A decent tripod, extra battery. You will need these for this sort of photography. Then i'd think about lighting. Then I'd think about glass, and then i'd think about body.

An interesting site which has some information on this and ideas/recomendations that might be of use: http://www.all-things-photography.com/introduction-to-property-photography.html (Note I am not in any way affiliated with said site).

[Longshots]

You do realize the top of the top real estate and commercial photographers in architecture and designs tend to use the best of the best digital large and medium format, with an army of lighting systems, easily blow over 40 or 50k.


You could probably quadruple that figure ! - my lights are replacement value alone in the region of $90,000 - no kidding. And I'm not what I would describe as spoilt for gear. And FWIW I dont use medium format, much as I would love to, because I cannot justify the economic investment of yet another $100,000 into an already over invested arsenal of gear.

[ricstew]

You need a basic camera that will bracket ( crop is fine ) and preferably a back up, a very heavy tripod, some flashes and triggers, a wide angle lens and one for detail shots ( macro is good but a 50mm is fine ), solid walking shoes and something to carry all the junk in. Bandaids, mozzie off and sunscreen wont go astray either.
Insurance for you, your gear and your car. A decent computer and programs to use. An ABN and an accountant.
and patience and practice.......and more practice......and then a bit more. Add marketing to the mix...........and that will get you going in the real estate stuff........further down the track ,if you decide its for you, and you want to do the architecture and magazine stuff you will have already upgraded all your stuff and spent a zillion dollars.....but for now just get the stuff you need and worry about the rest later.
and its fun.....
cheers
Jan

[zollo]

In my experience you definitely do not need top end gear for run of the mill RE or interior design. the only time I have ever used medium format in RE was when the client requested bill board sized prints and paid for the hire of equipment capable of outputting such. This was a new home builder.

I would, however recommend a camera that can handle higher ISO's cleanly and that usually means full frame. I can tell you that most "professional" RE outfits will already be using them, so you dont really want to start on a back foot.

As for tilt shift etc. its actually not used in RE as much as I thought it would be. In fact, I've hardly ever seen it!

[James T]

Adrienne, if you can make it to Port Melbourne tomorrow night, Dianna Snape is giving a talk for Trampoline (ACMP) at Blue Tree Studios. She'll be able to tell you more than most people in Melbourne about being an architectural photographer. Costs 10 bucks on the door (5 if you're a member) and that includes a drink or two. ;)

EDIT: Should say it's 7pm for a 7.30 start.

[Adrienne]

WOW! Everyone, thank you all so much for your expertise and opinions. I have gotten something from everyone's posts and as Jan said..."it's fun!"

James thanks for the heads up, it's actually my wedding anniversary tomorrow so we'll see how we go!

John cheers on the link, will have a look tonight....and JM I get your point about buying too much too soon and losing out on new technology.
Thanks again to all, lots to work on!

A
x

[beau]

There seems to be a trend occurring in Sydney of using HDR imaging as well, to get nice exposure indoors and also nice exposure outdoors through windows or sliding/folding doors in the same shot, so I'd suggest getting on top of HDR technique if you're not already. The agents seem to like it. They're also using a lot of night photography for both indoors and out on the higher value homes

I'm not a RE photographer, but I am in the market for a new property in the inner city so I have been looking at a lot of brochures and websites lately.

[ricktas]

Adrienne,

You have been a member since December, but we haven't seen a single photo yet. AP is a photography forum! So how about showing us some of your current work, and giving some other members a comment or two on their photos. After all, what it is really about is taking photos. A forum by definition is a place of interaction, so please give something back to others, as well as take all the advice you are being given. We can discuss business, or white balance all day long, but that does not a good photographer make.

I noted in your posts above, two comments:


I live in a bayside suburb and all serious agents in the area hire professionals that provide images that support the higher priced listing.
and

...Ebay has been my friend lately since I have this new photography addiction!!!

Now it is great that you are thinking ahead regarding a career in photography, but at the same time, with all due respect, you need to walk the walk first. I would suggest getting well past the new photography addiction stage before you ever consider being paid for photography. Get your course finished, get a heap experience photographically behind you, and then do a course on marketing along with one of business, and at that time start setting up your business. Remember that over 50% of all small business in Australia fail within 2 years. The best advice I can give is to do your research now, start planning and preparing yourself to run a business, get not only your photography skills up, but business and marketing ones as well. Do not stick to a single genre (RE), make sure you can offer more than that. Those businesses that do not fail are the ones that know their market inside out, have the skills to take photos and run a business. Good luck with it all, but I think you need to stop, take stock, plan and work forward at a slow and steady pace. I would say that as this is a new photography addiction, you will not be ready to even start a business for a minimum of 12-18 months.

You are entering a career path that is saturated with photographers in competition with you, in an ever decreasing marketplace, with everyone trying to make more money for themselves, by paying others less (or doing it themselves). To do this, you need to be better than everyone else in your area. There will always be someone else looking at starting in RE photography as well, and you need to be better than them in every way, otherwise guess who the agents are going to get to take their photos? Practice, Practice, Practice your photography and get your skills up now, and do the planning for your business, but do not start it. All you need is one or two jobs that you cannot do perfectly, cause your skills are not fully developed and those RE agents are not likely to use you again. You need to be able to, and have the confidence, and gear, to do everything spot on, and adapt to special requests by the agents/property owners.

Take it slow, show us some of your current work. After all, the most valuable feedback you can get, is from other photographers, at this point in your photographic development.

[Longshots]

Cant think of a more over saturated market.

Before you spend any money - I'd suggest posting some images and gain some real professional feedback from those "working" in the field.

Aptitude, skill, knowledge are the decision breakers to lift you from being able to better the RE agent with their own camera. Few seem to be offering that helpful suggestion. If you dont have those (and no offence but its not an easy field), then you have no chance of competing in a market that has gone so low in pricing that it literally defies business logic (prices are less than $50 to shoot a house inside and out, including high view shot, view shot from the house, and all interiors and exteriors).

[Adrienne]

You have been a member since December, but we haven't seen a single photo yet.

Rick, without going into the details of your reply I have tried to upload photos and view other's photos but the site doesn't allow me to do it. I read in the frequently asked questions that if I participated more in the forum then my profile would improve. I would be more than happy to interact more on the site.
Adrienne

[Adrienne]

Rick. This is what I get.....

Adrienne, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

[ricktas]

There is ZERO reason you cannot upload photos for critique etc. Access to members photos and ability to post your own happens within 60 minutes of your very first post to the site

To see all the member photos click FORUM (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/index.php) on the menu and scroll down and you will find all the member photos forums.

To resize your photos to meet the site size restrictions, see this tutorial (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?14971-How-to-resize-photographs-for-the-Internet)

As long as your photos meet the pixel and filesize requirements you have access to all of the site to post photos for critique etc.

To understand how to post photos, have a read of this Library section (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showlibrary.php?title=Indexes:How_Do_I)

[Keith Young]

Hi I thought I'd chime in as this issue right up my alley. I am a successful full-time RE photographer in Sydney. I think that although having or being able to afford a full-frame camera for RE photography would be great, it is not absolutely necessary. If you are just starting out, of course you are just going to use what you have. Pretty much any DSLR will do the job and any rectilinear lens that has approx 100deg angle of view get your foot in the door. It would be silly to spend thousands on a camera and on other equipment just to find out you cant even get your first client. Its a very hard climb to the top and there seems to be hundreds of photographers out there trying to undercut one another for the bottom end of the market. Unfortunately that is where everyone must start. You need to be able to rise above that get yourself a descent portfolio, a few regular clients then you are on your way. If you are any good you will be in demand and can raise your prices, if you are no good you will loose you clients and have to find an income elsewhere.

Learn and perfect HDR, but don't use it as your primary weapon of choice. HDR is a tool just like strobing and layering in Photoshop you need to learn when to use and not to use each technique and even combine all of them into one photo if needed. The nature of RE photography is that it is very post processing intensive you may find yourself spending more time at the computer than behind the camera, and it is these techniques that you will also need to perfect. As ricktas said it is a lot of effort for little reward it may initially seem easy but it is not!

[peterb666]

That's excellent advice Keith. Note that it probably won't help the OP as he hasn't been on AP since 2 days after is original post but it should be invaluable advice for others.

[Bally]

Pity the OP hasn't been back, lots of interesting advice here. From the RE side of th equation, can I suggest that there is still room for the professional tog in this industry. with the accent on professional. A tog needs to be able deliver a better product than a RE agent armed with an SLR. HDR and PP and good skills are just part of it. Professional includes ability to make the most of every location, on time, on budget and in appropriate formats as needed by the agent for web, brochure, printed ads, windows or other. Portfolio a must and sell the sizzle, agents need to be able to seperate themselves from the pack in the same way as the tog must, so understand the industry, who is paying the bills and who is the real customer, as this will vary from RE agent to RE agent. Vary the product to suit th edifferent markets, or focus on one, which ever way you go, differentiate yourself or go broke. Lots of market leaders in this industry, selling based on lots of different abilities, price, quality, service, trust, relationships. Manage your costs, time and market more that you shoot, and you might do well. Cheers

[johndom]

very good thoughts Bally, too many people think that price is the only differentiation.
Wheres the link to the should i work for free page when I want to quote it?

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?76725-Helpful-guide-if-you-ever-get-asked-to-work-for-free

ah there it is.
Should i drop my prices just to get another job?

[wjasin]

Hi everyone,
i joined this forum just a few days ago for something else and i came across this thread. this is my 1st post. i'll save my introduction for another thread, and i dont mean to hijack this thread by posting my own questions, so if the moderator feel i should create another thread, please let me know and i'll be glad to do so.

i have many questions, but i guess i'll save it for other occasions. as a background, im currently studying interior design in my final year. and im seriously thinking about a career in architectural/interior/RE photography instead of becoming interior designer.

most of you agree that practice practice practice is a good practice and posting images for review is good too, but what if the actual building/room isnt nice? it doesnt have to be like the ads we see or celebrity-level kind of nice, but decent enough house. because my house isnt exactly nice. and the thing with asking friends, we might have to move a few things for composition, clean up a few things, and before we know it, we've changed a lot just for the sake of a good frame and they may not like we move things around. im guessing offering a free service to RE agents is not a good move?


i hope my problem is clear as mud to you all. any pointers would be most welcome. thank you.
:)

[ricktas]

Hi everyone,
i joined this forum just a few days ago for something else and i came across this thread. this is my 1st post. i'll save my introduction for another thread, and i dont mean to hijack this thread by posting my own questions, so if the moderator feel i should create another thread, please let me know and i'll be glad to do so.

i have many questions, but i guess i'll save it for other occasions. as a background, im currently studying interior design in my final year. and im seriously thinking about a career in architectural/interior/RE photography instead of becoming interior designer.

most of you agree that practice practice practice is a good practice and posting images for review is good too, but what if the actual building/room isnt nice? it doesnt have to be like the ads we see or celebrity-level kind of nice, but decent enough house. because my house isnt exactly nice. and the thing with asking friends, we might have to move a few things for composition, clean up a few things, and before we know it, we've changed a lot just for the sake of a good frame and they may not like we move things around. im guessing offering a free service to RE agents is not a good move?


i hope my problem is clear as mud to you all. any pointers would be most welcome. thank you.
:)

Yes, if you are doing RE photography, you need to clean the room up! End of story! You are trying to present photos that will sell a home, and an untidy room won't! This is not about what your house looks like today, it is what it should look like to a potential buyer. If you cannot make it look, clean, tidy and respectable, then you are devaluing the house, cause people wont even go look at a house that looks messy in the advertising photos.

Offering your services for free is stupid! Cause then you spend your time and money (your gear cost money, and it will cost you money to get to the homes to take the photos), so you are not offering them for free, you are losing money by doing them for free. Once you do it for free, the RE agents will want it for free everytime.

[wjasin]

Hi Rick,
thanks for the quick reply. I see what you mean with sellability. I guess when we've done our best in tidying up, cleaning, etc, it's the ability to find that selling composition is what separates the good and the so-so RE photographer. Well, i guess my next question is, whose job is it to do the styling? the photographer or the agent/owner? is our job just pressing the shutter? my argument is, no, a RE photographer's job is not just to press the shutter, but to have a say when something's not right in the frame that s/he feels wouldnt help selling the property. however, if s/he does this, s/he might need to do the styling, which translates to more time and money that they should charge, but in the cut-throat RE world where it's gone down so cheap, it doesnt translate well and become either an added value service (ie: free service) or couldn't be bothered with styling and just press the shutter.
also, say i've grown out of taking photos of my house's interior and ready to take on more challenges, what can i do next? say for portfolio purposes, should i ask to take photos of my friends' houses?

sorry if i sound like i want to get free tutoring on how to start becoming a RE photographer (but i do...:D), it's just im seriously thinking but i have no one to ask in my circle of friends and i have lots of questions.* removed - site rule breach*

[ricktas]

Did you read through this thread wjasin? There is not much money to be made in the RE photography game for the vast majority of photographers, and this has been pointed out several times in this thread. You have joined up selecting that you are a beginner photographer, so to be blunt, spend a few years getting to know how to take great photos, and then, and only then, look at making this hobby a profession, either part of full-time. With all due respect, as a beginner, you should not be considering doing any work, photographically, for anyone, at this time.

[ricstew]

Somewhere in your agreement there should be a bit that tells about presenting the house to be photographed. I don't clean.....thats not in my agreement. I do move something if I need to, and I do put the toilet seat down but I don't clean. If its not up to standard you contact the agent and say its not up to standard......would you like me to come back when its been tidied up? If not you shoot it anyway. You can provide a walkthrough service but you charge that out too. In a walkthrough I provide the owner with advice on how best to prepare the house, garden etc for photos. I may even provide the odd prop but I don't so it for free. All of that will be reflected in the price.
cheers
Jan

[James T]

Hi Rick,
thanks for the quick reply. I see what you mean with sellability. I guess when we've done our best in tidying up, cleaning, etc, it's the ability to find that selling composition is what separates the good and the so-so RE photographer. Well, i guess my next question is, whose job is it to do the styling? the photographer or the agent/owner? is our job just pressing the shutter? my argument is, no, a RE photographer's job is not just to press the shutter, but to have a say when something's not right in the frame that s/he feels wouldnt help selling the property. however, if s/he does this, s/he might need to do the styling, which translates to more time and money that they should charge, but in the cut-throat RE world where it's gone down so cheap, it doesnt translate well and become either an added value service (ie: free service) or couldn't be bothered with styling and just press the shutter.
also, say i've grown out of taking photos of my house's interior and ready to take on more challenges, what can i do next? say for portfolio purposes, should i ask to take photos of my friends' houses?

sorry if i sound like i want to get free tutoring on how to start becoming a RE photographer (but i do...:D), it's just im seriously thinking but i have no one to ask in my circle of friends and i have lots of questions.* removed - site rule breach*

You should expect it to be in a reasonable state when you rock up. Then depending on the budget, client, prestige of the place, intent for the images you either shoot it maybe tweaking bits as you go. Or, you have a stylist come in and style the rooms.

For folio, shooting exteriors is easy, lots of places you can get good access from public land. Building up interiors maybe harder, you could look at talking to local businesses & people with nice houses and seeing if you can gain access. Yes, for free (boo, hiss, blah blah) but you can make it work for you.

[Keith Young]

A RE photographer may need to move some flowers or a chair, and open or close the curtains / blinds as required. A RE photographer is not a "stylist" as such and there are plenty of pro stylist out there that know how to do their job. A RE photog is definately not a cleaner or a removalist. My largest client now professionally styles about 95% of their properties, and the the stylist knows exactly what they are doing everytime. I only have to turn up, set up the lighting, open windows, doors and blinds and take the shot. A photo of a beautifully styled property I took a couple of weeks ago is here:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2363/5696110384_1663e384e2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithyoung/5696110384/)

All I had to do was open the doors and set up my gear for this house.

wjasin why don't you post some photos that you have taken and let us take a look and see if you are on the right track.

[wjasin]

Hi everyone,
thank you so much for the replies and helpful tips.

ricktas: yes, i have read, but sometimes i forget a few things here and there due to the many comments..:p
ricstew & James T: thank you for the info. James T: will try to muster up the courage :)
keith young: yes, i will try to post soon. yours look great. from the info on your flickr, are you exposing for outdoor and add strobes to indoor to light up the inside and balance the lighting? i guess your way of doing things is what i prefer compared to the HDR way. Not saying HDR is bad or anything, but i just think it takes more time in postprocess to balance everything and get a realistic type of HDR. and more time spent = more money lost IMHO.

[Keith Young]

Well no, that's not quite right and that's the whole thing you need to get you head around what is happening and how to deal with the situation and what compromises you may take to make it pop... First I am actually exposing for the indoor scene as it is the primary part of the composition. I then secondly I "try to control" the outside exposure mainly using shutter speed. During daylight hours it is rare to have the outside under-expose. But in the above shot I was very lucky as there was a couple of huge trees blocking most of the direct sunlight falling onto the outside area thus the exposure looks more balanced and natural. 1/50s at F8 under normal daylight conditions would normal be way over exposed, you can still see where I have let the blue sky totally blow out between the leaves.

The shot below taken earlier during the day from the other direction and had more sun on the outside area and the shutter is more than double the previous shot but I could recover just a touch of blue in the "real" sky but still have detail in the outside shadow areas. The sky is not the primary point of focus in this shot and I think that is where most RE photographers get it wrong. I know others would just paste in an under-exposed false sky and your mind would automatically says "something is not quite right!" I personally hate that type of photo. But that's just me.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3361/5695525965_bf602eb473_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/keithyoung/5695525965/)

[GerryK]

Like many people in this thread I agree with the view that you need to finish the course. I worked as a photographer for ten years whilst holding down a primary job so I could live (read eat). It was fun, teh weekend pay was great, but it killed my then marriage. Any kit will do to start with, as the key is in how you translate what you see in to an image

[James T]

... but it killed my then marriage...

That's an important point (I'm not saying this wasn't the case here Gerry, your post just brought it to mind) if you want to be a freelance photographer, a supportive and understanding partner goes a hell of a long way. I've found it also helps if she's an accountant. ;)