Real Estate shot with Protune

Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
43
Reaction score
5
Location
Central Florida
Website
www.nimbusvids.com
View media item 317
This is my first time sharing media so I hope the photo shows.

A realtor friend asked me to take some shots of this house and I took a lot, but I'm only posting this one for now. This is the before, I will post the after

Settings:
12MP
No Spot Meter
WB Native
Flat
ISO 400
Low
EV 0
Polar Pro ND8 (that was the only one I had with me other than the CP. does PolarPro make an ND4? Can't find it)

First, can anyone see any red flags with my settings or the choice in filter?

I haven't edited the footage yet, probably gonna use Lightroom, pixelmator, or something On the Adobe platform. If anyone has any favorites please share.
 
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
3,923
Reaction score
2,619
I think you don't have the filter pushed on all the way. That's definitely the corners of the filter, not the Solo's legs. You don't see the legs unless you're yawing hard with the camera in wide aspect. To use that shot, you'll have to crop it down to remove the corners. Also, a more ideal real estate shot would be from the front left corner. That way you see more of the home, plus the water and backdrop, and you don't see the neighbor's house.
 
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
43
Reaction score
5
Location
Central Florida
Website
www.nimbusvids.com
I think you don't have the filter pushed on all the way. That's definitely the corners of the filter, not the Solo's legs. You don't see the legs unless you're yawing hard with the camera in wide aspect. To use that shot, you'll have to crop it down to remove the corners. Also, a more ideal real estate shot would be from the front left corner. That way you see more of the home, plus the water and backdrop, and you don't see the neighbor's house.

So it turns out the filter can go on more, so that will get rid of the vignette. Thanks!

Also, I took a lot of photos and some are of the angles you mentioned. There are some really great ones from over the water but I didn't have my SD card when posting this. All the photos looks similar in color and I'm looking forward to editing a photo that had protune switched on, which I've never done.
 
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
3,923
Reaction score
2,619
Cool. I figured you had more than that. I have never tried to use protune and do post color enhancement. One of these days....
 

Sky

Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
Age
55
First, I'd correct the fisheye. Looks a bit flat or washed out, from a color/contrast point of view.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
61
Reaction score
13
Age
53
View media item 317
This is my first time sharing media so I hope the photo shows.

A realtor friend asked me to take some shots of this house and I took a lot, but I'm only posting this one for now. This is the before, I will post the after

Settings:
12MP
No Spot Meter
WB Native
Flat
ISO 400
Low
EV 0
Polar Pro ND8 (that was the only one I had with me other than the CP. does PolarPro make an ND4? Can't find it)

First, can anyone see any red flags with my settings or the choice in filter?

I haven't edited the footage yet, probably gonna use Lightroom, pixelmator, or something On the Adobe platform. If anyone has any favorites please share.

G'day, you've probably already moved on and finished this but here's a couple thoughts from a fellow non expert on your questions.

You have picked the right settings for video as per smarter people already. The thing about ND8 versus a lesser reduction like ND4 should be solvable by checking the shutter speed of the frame in EXIF details. Use more reduction to force a longer exposure, if you want that, otherwise in your case take it off or look for a 4... also the CP incurs some loss of light something like a stop or more of you're in a situation with lots of scatter or reflected light, so if you want less blur and still a bit slower shutter, it might work.

But then again, do you really need to allow the shutter down for stills? Another point I wanted to raise is that stills aren't video obviously... so the benefit of ND, low sharpness and even PT will be less required, though PT is probably always on, do you really need to spare the camera the sharpness processing when it's a still shot and there is no shortage of CPU time to sharpen? Just a thought. Even the flat setting might be wasting your time depending on the light and shot... but I still personally recommend flat so you get the most depth to edit later. You can always edit just to saturate and remove the barrel!

The other thing you might over shoot and play with is setting WB to an appropriate value and see if it gives you a more coherent look with less work... I am not convinced native WB is always useful, but again probably a good default. For stills it should be no problem to process these things in the camera but maybe the great talents we have on here can give more definite / numerical data on the differences and a recommendation with numbers!

As for the software it's probably just a call based on preference, but still I'd pick things that allow you to go fast and still keep the shots relatively harmonious, and that's probably not hard with any but maybe with stills and video both, you'll find some advantages to staying within Adobe tool chains or whatever you can use to apply the same colour and luminance type modifications, then do the more video editing specific steps... but that's not experience talking, I use Adobe mostly for video but I have chucked stills into Picasa even lol... depending on the use. Stills through Picasa then into panos has worked, but it's mostly just laziness and non critical stuff... the ProDrenalin stuff is really inexpensive and de-fisheyes and stabilises super fast so it might be a good workflow bus stop too, mostly for videos.

I'm always trying to learn but am possessed of (by?) a Day Job... :)

HTH,
Chris
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nimbus Ninja
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
43
Reaction score
5
Location
Central Florida
Website
www.nimbusvids.com
View media item 318
G'day, you've probably already moved on and finished this but here's a couple thoughts from a fellow non expert on your questions.

You have picked the right settings for video as per smarter people already. The thing about ND8 versus a lesser reduction like ND4 should be solvable by checking the shutter speed of the frame in EXIF details. Use more reduction to force a longer exposure, if you want that, otherwise in your case take it off or look for a 4... also the CP incurs some loss of light something like a stop or more of you're in a situation with lots of scatter or reflected light, so if you want less blur and still a bit slower shutter, it might work.

But then again, do you really need to allow the shutter down for stills? Another point I wanted to raise is that stills aren't video obviously... so the benefit of ND, low sharpness and even PT will be less required, though PT is probably always on, do you really need to spare the camera the sharpness processing when it's a still shot and there is no shortage of CPU time to sharpen? Just a thought. Even the flat setting might be wasting your time depending on the light and shot... but I still personally recommend flat so you get the most depth to edit later. You can always edit just to saturate and remove the barrel!

The other thing you might over shoot and play with is setting WB to an appropriate value and see if it gives you a more coherent look with less work... I am not convinced native WB is always useful, but again probably a good default. For stills it should be no problem to process these things in the camera but maybe the great talents we have on here can give more definite / numerical data on the differences and a recommendation with numbers!

As for the software it's probably just a call based on preference, but still I'd pick things that allow you to go fast and still keep the shots relatively harmonious, and that's probably not hard with any but maybe with stills and video both, you'll find some advantages to staying within Adobe tool chains or whatever you can use to apply the same colour and luminance type modifications, then do the more video editing specific steps... but that's not experience talking, I use Adobe mostly for video but I have chucked stills into Picasa even lol... depending on the use. Stills through Picasa then into panos has worked, but it's mostly just laziness and non critical stuff... the ProDrenalin stuff is really inexpensive and de-fisheyes and stabilises super fast so it might be a good workflow bus stop too, mostly for videos.

I'm always trying to learn but am possessed of (by?) a Day Job... :)

HTH,
Chris
Hey man, those are all great pointers!

I took this photo with auto WB, color: GoPro, low sharpness. I didn't have to do much in post, much quicker turn around.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
234
Reaction score
95
Location
Down South
YktSxBi.jpg
YktSxBi
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nimbus Ninja
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
Age
41
Hey Nimbus. Here's my version of your photo...I've done some real estate photography for a few friends as well and had a few tips if you're interested. Be careful of the color temperature when you are adjusting your pictures. Often times they want the pictures to be bright and vivid, but be careful as it's easy to make the photo look very unrealistic. I would focus on the white balance tool once you add some saturation to your images to make it pop. That way the colors look rich and full, but not too "cartoonish". So add saturation, then play with the white balance until the image starts to look realistic. In this pic I added some saturation so the greens are bright, then adjusted tint and colorbalance so the overall color wasn't too red or blue.
 

Attachments

  • nimbusphoto.jpg
    nimbusphoto.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 9
  • Like
Reactions: Nimbus Ninja
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
43
Reaction score
5
Location
Central Florida
Website
www.nimbusvids.com
Hey Nimbus. Here's my version of your photo...I've done some real estate photography for a few friends as well and had a few tips if you're interested. Be careful of the color temperature when you are adjusting your pictures. Often times they want the pictures to be bright and vivid, but be careful as it's easy to make the photo look very unrealistic. I would focus on the white balance tool once you add some saturation to your images to make it pop. That way the colors look rich and full, but not too "cartoonish". So add saturation, then play with the white balance until the image starts to look realistic. In this pic I added some saturation so the greens are bright, then adjusted tint and colorbalance so the overall color wasn't too red or blue.

Absolutely. Great points! My realtor wife (who is my number one customer lol) likes more realistic photos, so using tons of post for non-real estate photos is where I have more fun. Thanks for sharing!
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
234
Reaction score
95
Location
Down South
Damn, tell me you didn't spend much time on this, care to share your tweeks? I'm watching Lightroom tutorials every day. I bought a few presets that have helped a lot.
hey, no, I only spent about 3 minutes if you include copying your original jpeg and uploading my tweaked to imgur..hehe

For me, being only a gopro still, theres only so much you can do to the images...theres no real practical way to get perfectly focused shots, so you cant get too crazy in post. I think you just, first correct white balance/color temp, secondly add some contrast, and then add saturation until you hit the sweet spot. I prbly went a tiny bit overboard on the saturation on that, but overall I think its pleasing. Cool house...happy flying!
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
12,915
Messages
146,672
Members
15,464
Latest member
Dronecarrot