Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Willow Photography on February 25, 2013, 04:19:25 pm

Title: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 25, 2013, 04:19:25 pm
Hi

I have started to do some architectural / interior photography and love it.

Are there any architectural / interior photographers here that can
give some advice to what kind of equipment that is best suited?

I have a Nikon D800E and a Contax645/P65+.

Is a tech camera the best route or is there other options that are "better"?

I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past.

Hopefully some of you guys can give me some good advice.

Thanks

Willow

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: pixjohn on February 25, 2013, 06:30:40 pm
I shoot with a digital back and tech camera.

I use to think digtal back and tech camera was the way to go, but if I had todays dslr and lenses I might have just skipped the DB and saved a lot of money. Yes the qulity is better with DB but I don't think clients see or care enough about  the differnece. Its hard to compete with a $50,000 camera set up against a kid with a $5000 dslr and lenses.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 25, 2013, 08:58:18 pm
I shoot with a digital back and tech camera.

I use to think digtal back and tech camera was the way to go, but if I had todays dslr and lenses I might have just skipped the DB and saved a lot of money. Yes the qulity is better with DB but I don't think clients see or care enough about  the differnece. Its hard to compete with a $50,000 camera set up against a kid with a $5000 dslr and lenses.

It's not only kids using DSLR's.
It's quite amazing what even a $ 1,100 dslr can do:

(http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_01_l.jpg)

Hires here:

http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_01_l.jpg (http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_01_l.jpg)

http://www.cameraegg.org/nikon-d7100-sample-images-movies/#1 (http://www.cameraegg.org/nikon-d7100-sample-images-movies/#1)

Imagine this sensor scaled up to a FF D4X

Add stitching and it's a whole new world:

Shot with a Canon 550 and a $ 800 200mm L lens

http://youtu.be/8CPQMMglj7I (http://youtu.be/8CPQMMglj7I)

Some good examples of commercial stitching.

http://www.zeroplusplus.com/panorama-image-stitching/ (http://www.zeroplusplus.com/panorama-image-stitching/)

and an example of a very high res interior

http://www.360pano.eu/nevsky/ (http://www.360pano.eu/nevsky/)
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on February 25, 2013, 11:39:13 pm
I shoot with a digital back and tech camera.

I use to think digtal back and tech camera was the way to go, but if I had todays dslr and lenses I might have just skipped the DB and saved a lot of money. Yes the qulity is better with DB but I don't think clients see or care enough about  the differnece. Its hard to compete with a $50,000 camera set up against a kid with a $5000 dslr and lenses.
Personally I would prefer the tech camera setup, which is why I as an young kid will be upgrading soon.  In terms of thinking about composing, I find it so annoying to have to shift and twist in stead of moving the standard on two axises that are independent of each other.  Another thing that I can not wait to be able to do is true multiple exposures.  It is so frustrating to show up with 6 or 7 heads, enough to balance the scene with no weird shadows or casts, only to find you are short on power by about 50%.  Soon I will be able to pop the strobes as many times as it takes.   ;D

In terms of competing, I find that yes, no client really cares about the IQ as far as we do, so I never talk about it.  I concentrate on my service and the fact that I light all of my shots  There is more that separates a true pro from someone just charging to have fun than IQ or megapixels.  In the end, many are happy signing on the line.

"You have to provide more value.  If people do not want to pay then you are not providing enough value for what you are charging."  Seth Godin
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on February 25, 2013, 11:44:27 pm
Hi

I have started to do some architectural / interior photography and love it.

Are there any architectural / interior photographers here that can
give some advice to what kind of equipment that is best suited?

I have a Nikon D800E and a Contax645/P65+.

Is a tech camera the best route or is there other options that are "better"?

I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past.

Hopefully some of you guys can give me some good advice.

Thanks

Willow


What kind of lighting equipment do you have?  In the end, it may be best to start there.  I bring 2 Profoto Acute packs with 4 D4 heads, and rent more about 40% of the time.  For tungsten, I also have 4 750w flood lights, 2 650w fresnel lights, 3 420w fresnels, several conical lights with varying wattage of bulbs.  I also own several different kins of gels for both color and diffusion, and bring window gels too.  (Scouted a job today where I will be choosing to gel the windows). 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: torger on February 26, 2013, 04:03:04 am
A "pancake" tech camera with plenty shift movements and high precision helical focus rings and laser distance meter, Arca-Swiss RM3Di or an Alpa. I'd probably choose RM3Di myself. With the P65+ back you can use Schneider Digitar wide angles I think, which is a little bit less expensive than Rodenstock Digarons, but make sure to check the maximum shift capability before color cast gets too severe.

I use a view camera myself but would I do interiors professionally in large volume I'd like to have a pancake camera, ground glass is not *that* fun with wides in poor light.

That pancake camera would be the "best equipment", but if we consider the economy side of it, you might find that D800E with standard lenses and lens correction software (distortion/perspective) to be adequate. Since you already own a digital back though (which is the major cost in a tech camera system) I'd seriously consider the tech cam alternative. I find it more pleasing to be able to fully solve the composition during shooting with shifting and get a fully perspective correct distortion free image out of the camera, than to correct in software.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Enda Cavanagh on February 26, 2013, 05:14:15 am
Hi Willow
I use a Cambo Wide DS tech camera (soon upgrading to an Arca RL 3D)
The advantages that a D800 has over the tech camera is speed of use in every aspect of the shot. If your client is on a tighter budget that might be a consideration.  Proper Live view would be a real aid in setting up the shot. Also the fact that you see what the shot will be like when viewing through the viewfinder makes life easier. You can shoot much longer exposures on a 35mm camera. There is a cut off point where you can take night shots at some locations because most medium format backs are limited by a minute or 2 max exposure times.
However you have a vast range of focal lengths to choose from for a tech camera compared to the few you get from Schneider, Nikon and Canon. That's a real stumbling block for me. Also the range of movements possible with a tech camera, especially on the newer lenses with larger image circles is phenomenal.
Many clients wouldn't be very interested in knowing if it's a 32 mega pixel camera or an 80 mega pixel back. At the end of the day the vast majority of images will be for a magazine or book so you don't need to print huge images. In fact I have to size my images down to A3 width. Some clients couldn't handle 230 - 430 meg files on their computers!!

I use the tech camera primarily because it allows me to take an image exactly as I want to, combined with fantastic distortion free glass in the Schneider lenses.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: georgem on February 26, 2013, 10:00:57 am
Hi,

IMO, a lot depends on who your clients are. If you are targeting architects, then my suggestion is to use shift lenses (or a tech camera). Shifting really goes beyond correcting converging verticals and allows you to manipulate the composition in ways that correction in post cannot. Most importantly, you can avoid having all lines converge to the center of the frame, which usually looks wrong when doing one-point perspective and introduces large expanses of floor and ceiling that dominate the frame in two-point perspective. Whereas, using rises/falls and lateral shifts (at the same time) you can create a more interesting composition, one which architects will understand and appreciate. Studying architectural sketches can be very informative.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 26, 2013, 11:15:32 am
Thanks guys for the input so far.

My plan was to buy a RM3Di with this new eModule cloud.

If I just want to buy two lenses, what would you recommend?

From a former topic here, I should not buy the SK28 mm ?! .-)

Willow


Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 26, 2013, 11:26:21 am
Joe

I have two Broncolor Grafit with 5 heads and three Profoto D1.
Just needs some tungsten lamps.

Willow
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 26, 2013, 11:44:33 am
And Fred  :'( :-* :-\ :-X :-[ :P ::) ??? 8) :o :( >:( ;D :D ;) :)
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Gandalf on February 26, 2013, 11:51:50 am
I thought it was pretty well agreed here that a D800e is the best camera for everything, but if you insist on antiquated technology that is up to you.
The P65+ is a fine back assuming you are shooting tethered all the time. I mention this because I know a couple architectural photographers who only shoot to cards unless they have an AD looking over their shoulder. I like to see what I'm getting, so tend to shoot tethered whenever possible. If you are shooting to cards, you really owe it to yourself to try an IQ or Credo back. If you get enough dynamic range and you are happy with the colors of the 60 MP back, they do give you a wider and less expensive lens selection than an 80 MP back.

Make sure you test a RM3Di if you haven't used one. I thought it was the tech cam that I wanted, but after a very short time playing with one I knew it wasn't going to work for me. It wasn't one specific thing, it was the whole package. Also, if you are basing your purchase on the eModule, make sure you are working with a dealer who can get you one. I'm not sure where you are located, but in the States, Arca gear can be hard to actually get your hands on. Anyone will place an order for you, it is delivery that is a little trickier. In theory, the Arca should allow higher focus precision, but in reality I'm not sure that pans out.

As far as lenses, I have no clue. That depends on how you see and how you shoot, and what your clients expect. For example, if you are comfortable doing a lot of stitching, you can use a wider lens and have the look of a longer lens. It also depends on budget and whether you plan to move to an 80 MP back at some point in the future or not. Something that I have found and can't explain is you get more depth of field with a tech cam than a DSLR at a given aperture. I can't explain it, and it may just be a massive difference in lens sharpness, but the difference on screen is pretty clear to me, even with a 33 MP back. The Rodie 23, 32 and 40 HR lenses are very, very nice, but large and pricey.

Definitely pickup some tungsten lamps. I don't think they are that practical in daylight just because you need a ton of power, but I use them whenever I can.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on February 26, 2013, 12:21:39 pm
On a full frame DSLR, I shoot with the 24 most of the time and crop in.  So I personally will be going with the 35mm and 60mm to start.  

I personally will be getting the RM3Di and love how the camera is engineered.  I also love the fact that Arca makes their system so compatible with each other, meaning I can use lenses mounted on the R in the M2.  That being said, I can see how others do not like the system, not to mention the handles are the ugliest things.  (first thing I plan in doing is to carve new handles out of Cocobolo.)  I would make sure you get your hands on the thing before buying.  Cambo and Alpa are other options people really like.  
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: yaya on February 26, 2013, 02:04:30 pm
And Fred  :'( :-* :-\ :-X :-[ :P ::) ??? 8) :o :( >:( ;D :D ;) :)

I guess this mean that you did not like the interior design of that plane? or was it the architecture of the water in the background that was not to your liking?????
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 27, 2013, 12:28:23 am
I guess this mean that you did not like the interior design of that plane? or was it the architecture of the water in the background that was not to your liking?????

You can take the piss all you want Yaya. ;)

I posted that image as a follow up to a previous post that was made by the owner of a tech camera.
I shoot with a digital back and tech camera.

I use to think digtal back and tech camera was the way to go, but if I had today's dslr and lenses I might have just skipped the DB and saved a lot of money. Yes the qulity is better with DB but I don't think clients see or care enough about  the differnece. Its hard to compete with a $50,000 camera set up against a kid with a $5000 dslr and lenses.
I posted this just to show that the quality coming from the latest sensors, even 24MP crop sensors is outstanding.
It was not intended to be an example of architectural photography. Yaya... the camera was only recently announced... I'm sure we
will see some fine interior examples soon

Here are some nice landscapes for example:
(http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_05_l.jpg)

higher res here:
http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_05_l.jpg (http://chsvimg.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/img/sample/img_05_l.jpg)

Put that sensor
on a robotic head and use rectilinear stitching and you have a high dynamic range camera with a virtual sensor far larger than that of a tech camera.
The resulting files are large enough to do perspective correction in post and the results are cleaner in the corners than any significantly shifted lens
on a digiback.

Do the same with a D800 and it's even better, but one should also consider that scaling up the D7100 sensor to FF would be something
in the order of 57MP.  A stitch with that would be quite something.

Giants like Apple, Samsung, Microsoft and Google have advanced stitching research programs. Google chose stitching with 35mm DSLRs for it's global Art project of ultra high resolution.
Microsoft owner of Corbis is one of the worlds largest photo vendors and google the largest seller of advertizing..... something to think about when both are heavily investing
in stitching technology.

John Brack impressed NASA and National geographic with stitching shot with a point and shoot... and was hired to document the decommissioning of the three
space shuttles.

John Brack shooting for NASA and National Geographic:
(http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/files/2012/04/monday_blog_2-950x633.jpg)

His work for NASA can be seen here:
 http://www.jonbrack.com (http://www.jonbrack.com)

John is exacly one of the smart kids pixjohn was referring too.

But it's not only the "kids".. South African architectural photographer Peter Hassal
makes good use of stitching with his DSLR's.

Here's an interview with him by Nikon.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=496749267003630 (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=496749267003630)


Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 27, 2013, 03:02:56 am
Fred, why cant you just respect other people?

I started this topic and should be respected when I state
that I only want advice from people that are doing architectural / interior photography for a living.

You have bombarded almost every topic on LuLa with your anti-MFD and pro DSLR posting.
That is mainly why I wrote "I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past".

And yet you respond to my post.

You spend so much time on these board so you must have seen that I am no
newcomber to this place.
You should then have understood that I have seen most of your earlier posts and fully
understand your viewpoint on what camera to use in every possible photography task.
And why I wrote "I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past".

Your posts about DSLRs have NO value to me.

I have a D800E and I know it is a fantastic camera.
It probably could be the only camera I need to satisfy my clients.
But it is NOT the only camera system to satisfy me.

I know you get this.
Or else you wouldnt shoot with Fuji GX680 and 8x10


Capish??  :)

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: torger on February 27, 2013, 06:40:56 am
I only want advice from people that are doing architectural / interior photography for a living.

Ooops, I kind of missed that too, sorry ;). I have shot architectural / interior and found the shift capability be tremendously useful, as laser distance meter focusing, but I haven't actually got paid...

In this genre one often wants to use rise/fall and shift left/right simultaneously, which makes DSLR shift lenses cumbersome to use.

You can get equivalent result as a high res sensor with shift-capable lens by stitching and projection mapping (done such stuff in Hugin, it does the real thing, i e not the same as simple keystoning), but it will be a post-processing heavy work, and shooting process less enjoyable if you ask me. You could also use a ultra-wide on the DSLR and crop to get a lighter workflow, but then you get much lower resolution output.

I'd say that exactly in this genre the MF (with pancake tech cam) offer is the strongest compared to a budget DSLR alternative.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on February 27, 2013, 11:07:21 am
hi willow,
i do architecture and interiors for a living. and since many years. from 4x5 film to mf-digital to my latest combo which i use since years now:  a canon 5D2. I use this camera mainly for 2 reasons: the fantastic 17mm shift lens and the good live view.

the 17mm lens is that good that I even use a teleconverter to get to 24mm. nearly distortion (+/-2%) and ca free.
especialy when in really dark interiors the live view (with a fully shifted lens) is immensely helpfull.
I guess I use the 17mm for about 60% of all images, 20% at 24mm (the rest: pentax and mamiya mf-lenses with a zörk-shiftadaper).
(if nikon had a lens and a life view as good as the canon I would have converted to nikon by now).

regards   stefan
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ACH DIGITAL on February 27, 2013, 11:21:14 am
Hi Willow, coming from shooting 4x5 film on technical cameras, I'm more than happy to be using a D800 and several lenses for architectural, interior photography.
http://www.achdigital.com (http://www.achdigital.com)
These days Architects look for a corrected image with good enough resolution for magazines and print no longer than 40". They are more impressed with the final quality of your photograph, good composition, tones and colors.
They don't get impressed with expensive equipment.
Most of all, if you work faster with DSLR, they would be happy to save some bucks.

ACH
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on February 27, 2013, 12:14:59 pm
Bang on. And as a result of being more productive in the field, I give the client more selection and opportunities to increase sales.

I do rent and would prefer to buy a MF tech camera rig at some point, but I would rarely use it for commercial architectural photography if at all. I want it for my B&W art work.

Quote
In this genre one often wants to use rise/fall and shift left/right simultaneously, which makes DSLR shift lenses cumbersome to use.

Not......
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 27, 2013, 01:16:12 pm
Fred, why cant you just respect other people?

I started this topic and should be respected when I state
that I only want advice from people that are doing architectural / interior photography for a living.

You have bombarded almost every topic on LuLa with your anti-MFD and pro DSLR posting.
That is mainly why I wrote "I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past".

..........


Well I have made money doing architectural and industrial photography.
I have published interior design in leading fashion magazines and one of the largest civil engineering companies
in Italy was a client of mine.
I still do some architecural today.Celebrities like to use who they know from previous work and that have a reputation for privacy.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 27, 2013, 01:22:23 pm


I have a D800E and I know it is a fantastic camera.
It probably could be the only camera I need to satisfy my clients.
But it is NOT the only camera system to satisfy me.


I know you get this.
Or else you wouldnt shoot with Fuji GX680 and 8x10


Capish??  :)



Sure you make it pretty clear that the D800E is what is needed and you want
a tech camera for pleasure and personal choice. Nothing wrong with that at all.
Plenty of people buying Maserati sports cars and driving them in Malibu where the speed limit is
45 mph. They are lovely cars. Tech cameras are nice objects.

However there is a big difference between shooting film and paper on large and very large formats compared to the marginal difference between D800E and P65+
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: sgilbert on February 27, 2013, 01:30:25 pm
"Well I have made money doing architectural and industrial photography."

Please post some of your D800 architectural and industrial work.  I'm sure it's all "A-list."
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on February 27, 2013, 01:50:42 pm
bang on, again!

my mf-camera gets about exclusively used for personal work (www.stefanmarquardt.de (http://www.stefanmarquardt.de)) - I would never use the canon for that.
for commercial architecture it´s the canon in 99% of the cases.

stefan
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Gandalf on February 27, 2013, 02:32:49 pm
I think we need to keep a few things top of mind in this discussion.

1. The OP has a D800e. He knows what it can do. He also has a P65+. He knows what that can do. He wants to put the P65+ on a tech cam, let's help him.
2. The D800e is a truly amazing DSLR, but it doesn't have the lenses that a lot of us need. Of course, not all architectural photographers use lens movements. I know one very good one who has a tech cam and prefers to shoot with a Phase DF. He sees the tech cam as too cumbersome.
3. The Canon 17 TSE and 24 TSE are amazing lenses and give many photographers and clients everything they need. That is not true for all photographers and all clients. Whether the image is shot to be mostly done in camera or mostly assembled in post has a lot to do with this. Personally, if I could put Canon TSE lenses on a D800e, and have it tether seamlessly in C1, I don't know that MFD would interest me.
4. If you put a tech cam and a 5DII on the same tripod and shoot the same image/image series, there will be a difference (particularly in the look, color and dynamic range of artificially lit wood), but whether that difference is meaningful is another story. I see the difference and it is important to me. Unfortunately, my clients do not for the way they use the images, which thus far have been almost entirely websites. I have never printed a comparison so I can't say whether that translates into print or not. Generally a client picks an image and only that one gets worked up.
5. Stitching works really well on an internet forum. On a shoot, particularly when there is exposure and focus bracketing, it can be more difficult.
6. Some people have shooting styles that dictate a certain type of gear. I hadn't thought about this, but an assistant on a recent shoot pointed out that a lot of how I shoot, particularly when I'm in a hurry could not be done solo with a tech cam.
7. There are a lot of people with heavy MFD system investments that prefer to use a DSLR. There are others shooting with a single lens on a Cambo DS with an Aptus 22 because that is the only way they could afford a tech cam. Neither is more right than the other.

Now, back to your previously scheduled $hit fight.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: phoTOMgraphy on February 27, 2013, 03:06:27 pm
i'm using an rm3di with 28mm rodenstock and 43mm schneider lens for architectural and landscape work. as well as a hasselblad h3d with some lenses.

the rm3di is a joy to use, if one likes the tech cam feeling.  ;D
it's built quality is phenomenal.
but it may depend on your digital back if you gonna be happy with it or not. i'm using an old hasselblad h3d-39 back and i'm always jealous when i read posts from the p1 IQ-fraction, because my back has neither live view nor a good screen to judge focus. actually it's a pain to work with for many reasons on a tech cam.
but thats no fault of the camera. the p65+ is clearly better in many terms, but still has not the advantages of the IQ's.

°if i haven't already had this DB with the hasselblad body - maybe i wouldn't have purchased a tech-cam simply because the whole investment is that big.
°@ 5DII or D800: some clients may think - hey this guy has the same camera like my son, why do we pay a whole lot of money, when all we have to do is getting that lens?
°i also do have a d800, but not for architectural work. and there is a visible difference in tonality and detail between d800 and the hasselblad and even more when used on the rm3di
°unfortunately nikon doesn't offer a 17mm t/s or rather a 24mm t/s in canon quality. so the d800 is no solution for architectural work for me.

 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Stefan.Steib on February 27, 2013, 03:14:55 pm
Willow

did you ever take a look at the HCam or FPS ?
The concept offers unprecedented wideangle with nearly none of the problems that view camera/Frames have with real WA lenses of Schneider or Rodenstock.
means : 80 Mpix with up to 126,3 degrees of image angle(17mm TS-E), movements and no LCC at all needed.
The 24mm TSE will deliver 108,9 degrees with available movements of up to 8mm /no LCC/ no Centerfilter/ and significantly lower lens price.
About all of our customers do intense work on car interiors, architecture and other stuff that needs this extreme wideangle.

see e.g. here   http://www.hcam.de/downloads/digit0411_riess.pdf     campaign for Agip photographed with HCam B1 and 17mm TSE

More infos here:  http://hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam1.htm

Regards
Stefan
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: phoTOMgraphy on February 27, 2013, 03:29:32 pm
one thing that struggles me about the hcam and the new alpa antagonist: i can't imagine that a lens designed for 35mm dslr will ever outresolve a 80mpx back. it probably won't even outresolve an 40mpx back.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 27, 2013, 03:40:10 pm

5. Stitching works really well on an internet forum. On a shoot, particularly when there is exposure and focus bracketing, it can be more difficult.


Works in the real world and also on the internet or computer screen displays at shows. Interactive ultra hi res images that can be explored.

Focus stacking and stitching is doable. Just requires the right technique.
If you are using a pano head focus stack each segment first and stitch afterwards.
IF you are using a locked down sift lens moving the camera/sensor for a rectalinear stitch..... Stitch first and then focus stack.

Camera control software can be used to control the camera exposure and control the lens focus. The process is quite automated.

Another option for a digiback is using an old view camera and a stitching back. Moving the back on the back of the camera produces a very easy to stitch
set of images.  Kapture group makes a really nice one.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Stefan.Steib on February 27, 2013, 03:40:54 pm
Hi Thomas

this was answered in Detail here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=75282.0

see also here

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=75245.0

Regards
Stefan
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: pixjohn on February 27, 2013, 03:44:32 pm
If you have the money and the time to shoot, The tech camera is the way to go for quality. If you like to shoot faster avoid db problems, the D800 is the way to go.

I have spent a lot of time working out the bugs with my Leaf and Cambo set up. I love the result but still have problems from time to time. The best solution is to do a test shoo,t and see what you like shooting with. Everyone likes a differnt workflow.

I never hear canon/nikon shooters complain about the workflow and technical problem, but I see lot of post about db tech problems?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on February 27, 2013, 03:47:43 pm
Willow

did you ever take a look at the HCam or FPS ?
The concept offers unprecedented wideangle with nearly none of the problems that view camera/Frames have with real WA lenses of Schneider or Rodenstock.
means : 80 Mpix with up to 126,3 degrees of image angle(17mm TS-E), movements and no LCC at all needed.
The 24mm TSE will deliver 108,9 degrees with available movements of up to 8mm /no LCC/ no Centerfilter/ and significantly lower lens price.
About all of our customers do intense work on car interiors, architecture and other stuff that needs this extreme wideangle.

see e.g. here   http://www.hcam.de/downloads/digit0411_riess.pdf     campaign for Agip photographed with HCam B1 and 17mm TSE

More infos here:  http://hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam1.htm

Regards
Stefan

Can you mount the lens to the tripod and use your 8mm shift each way to do an easy rectalinear stitch to achieve more coverage and a higher
pixel count and a larger virtual sensor?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Stefan.Steib on February 27, 2013, 03:56:15 pm
yes we even have develloped a special longer stitch clamp for the HCam and the 17 and 24mm TS-E this allows horizontal stitch in either portrait or landscape mode.
For vertical stitch it needs to be angled 90 Degrees. See here

http://hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

Regards
Stefan

BTW: this will of course also work with the FPS...... and any Canon Body.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 27, 2013, 04:17:52 pm
Willow

did you ever take a look at the HCam or FPS ?
The concept offers unprecedented wideangle with nearly none of the problems that view camera/Frames have with real WA lenses of Schneider or Rodenstock.
means : 80 Mpix with up to 126,3 degrees of image angle(17mm TS-E), movements and no LCC at all needed.
The 24mm TSE will deliver 108,9 degrees with available movements of up to 8mm /no LCC/ no Centerfilter/ and significantly lower lens price.
About all of our customers do intense work on car interiors, architecture and other stuff that needs this extreme wideangle.

see e.g. here   http://www.hcam.de/downloads/digit0411_riess.pdf     campaign for Agip photographed with HCam B1 and 17mm TSE

More infos here:  http://hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam1.htm

Regards
Stefan


Hi Stefan

I have looked into the Hartblei.

But the problem is that I need to try before I buy and there are no
Hartblei distributor in Norway ( same with Arca Swiss ).

This makes the route even more difficult to choose.

Its to much money to spend without testing it.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: phoTOMgraphy on February 27, 2013, 04:25:34 pm
Hi Thomas

this was answered in Detail here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=75282.0

see also here

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=75245.0

Regards
Stefan

hi stefan,

i followed that thread and i saw a big difference in the files gerald.d shared. the 24mm tse performed nod bad, but i like the rodenstock level of detail far more especially when looking towards the corners...
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: pedro39photo on February 27, 2013, 05:29:46 pm
" MFD Vs DSLRs  postings..." so boring...i hope that Nikon launch a 80MP 35mm for 1000$ bucks !!! and soon for this debates ends.
I love my heavy H3DII 39MP, low iso, tripod on shoulders.
Just the pleasure of the eye composition in a such a big viewfinder like a 645 format justify a big price tag !!!
If the technology brings a Smartphone with the same quality of a MFD for 600$ anyone will reclaim that its beter to work with a PHONE?

LETS MAKE A TAG " MFD post, just for stupid stubborn image religion fanatics...35mm evangelist keep away..."


PedroNunes

      
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ACH DIGITAL on February 27, 2013, 05:48:36 pm
Jajajaa. Some people think because the spent more money and have a bigger camera would make them better photographers..
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 27, 2013, 05:57:03 pm
I would appreciate if we could keep this thread clean without any snide remarks
and not make it into a MFDB/DSLR war  :)
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on February 27, 2013, 06:15:31 pm
I apologize if I have contributed to that, but having made my living at this since 1978 and taught AP at two universities with opportunities to use and test a broad range of equipment in both a teaching environment and for clients, I feel an obligation to share my real life experiences on questions like these.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 27, 2013, 07:05:34 pm
I apologize if I have contributed to that, but having made my living at this since 1978 and taught AP at two universities with opportunities to use and test a broad range of equipment in both a teaching environment and for clients, I feel an obligation to share my real life experiences on questions like these.

IMO you have not contributed to that.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on February 27, 2013, 08:14:18 pm
Thanks,

FWIW, the hottest AP in the world, Iwan Baan (http://www.iwan.com/iwan_index.php) (who amongst other things won the first Julius Schulman Award and look at his client list) uses DSLRs. He has a much looser style than traditional APs (like me). Who first informed me about Iwan Baan and his huge influence on AP? the CEO of Hedrich-Blessing..........enough said?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ACH DIGITAL on February 27, 2013, 08:45:24 pm
Willow, I think we should concentrate more on creating better images and learning from each other rather than creating walls among us.
You had great opinions here coming from all sort of professionals. We have to value that.
Pedro, In the film days, 4x5 people used to make fun of others not using Sinars and Broncolor lighting. 21/4 had the laugh if you used Mamiya or Bronica and not Hasselblad.
Now is the war of sensor sizes and megapixels. The only one making profit of this none senses are the commercial brands.
I value this forum and its members from which I have learned through the years. There are actually very few forums where we can go.
ACH
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: julienlanoo on February 28, 2013, 05:28:06 am
I ve got the Rm3di, and shneiders, best investment i ve ever made, however, i ve had a cloud in order (and paid) for 6 months, not yet out on market, As Martin wants it to be perfect ! So the cloud could be a W8 if you buy now :p...

Hehe
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: torger on February 28, 2013, 05:51:59 am
Your shooting style affects the choice too of course. We who reply usually assume that our own shooting style is the best and is what everyone should strive for :D. For example, I can't live without lens movements, I like strict perspectives with perfect vertical and horizontal lines indoors (prefer slight converging outdoors), i e both rise/fall and left/right shift required, sometimes simultaneously. Some rarely do movements at all and choose to turn the camera instead or place the camera such that shift is not required. You can do great images with both styles. The less interested you are in movements the less of an advantage a tech camera will be.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: tesfoto on February 28, 2013, 05:52:22 am
Thanks,

FWIW, the hottest AP in the world, Iwan Baan (http://www.iwan.com/iwan_index.php) (who amongst other things won the first Julius Schulman Award and look at his client list) uses DSLRs. He has a much looser style than traditional APs (like me). Who first informed me about Iwan Baan and his huge influence on AP? the CEO of Hedrich-Blessing..........enough said?

I was shooting on the same assignment as Iwan Baan some month ago, and had the chance to talk to him about his shooting style and equiptment. You are right that he is the hottest AP in the world with an impressive client list. Iwan comes from a Photo Journalistic bacground, hence his photographis approach and talent for including people in his images.

He works with a 1Dx, the 17 and 24 TS and two zooms 24-70 and 70-200. Interesting he shoots handheld 90% of the times and just bumps ISO up, he is not afraid of 6400 og higher ISO, he never uses any lights. This is complete opposite of normal AP working with MFD, pancake cameras shooting with tripod and 50 ISO and bringing ton of lightig equiptment.

I think the AP business and style changes at this moment more to a Iwan Baan style, and was I to reinvest just for AP I would not go the MF way. I am with Stefan Marquardt using my canon for 99% of my commercial Architectural work, and using my IQ160 for personal work.

I think this is real life experience for European Architectural Photography, you can simply cover more grounds with the Canon as opposed to the MF back shooting style (always shooting the damn plexy for LCC). This is not a war between DSLR and MFD backs, a lot of professional photographers would have both and choose what is the best for the job. In my case I choose the Canon 99% of the time for AP. I choose the Canon for speed and flexibility AND the post production time is 1/3 of the Phase.

Willow I hope you can use this info. I think traditional AP is changing towards a more loos and flexible style aka Iwan Baan.

Cheers TES
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: georgem on February 28, 2013, 12:22:01 pm
I was shooting on the same assignment as Iwan Baan some month ago
[...]

So as not to be OT, some thoughts-a reply on this thread (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=75806.0).
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on February 28, 2013, 01:03:44 pm
I was shooting on the same assignment as Iwan Baan some month ago, and had the chance to talk to him about his shooting style and equiptment. You are right that he is the hottest AP in the world with an impressive client list. Iwan comes from a Photo Journalistic bacground, hence his photographis approach and talent for including people in his images.

He works with a 1Dx, the 17 and 24 TS and two zooms 24-70 and 70-200. Interesting he shoots handheld 90% of the times and just bumps ISO up, he is not afraid of 6400 og higher ISO, he never uses any lights. This is complete opposite of normal AP working with MFD, pancake cameras shooting with tripod and 50 ISO and bringing ton of lightig equiptment.

I think the AP business and style changes at this moment more to a Iwan Baan style, and was I to reinvest just for AP I would not go the MF way. I am with Stefan Marquardt using my canon for 99% of my commercial Architectural work, and using my IQ160 for personal work.

I think this is real life experience for European Architectural Photography, you can simply cover more grounds with the Canon as opposed to the MF back shooting style (always shooting the damn plexy for LCC). This is not a war between DSLR and MFD backs, a lot of professional photographers would have both and choose what is the best for the job. In my case I choose the Canon 99% of the time for AP. I choose the Canon for speed and flexibility AND the post production time is 1/3 of the Phase.

Willow I hope you can use this info. I think traditional AP is changing towards a more loos and flexible style aka Iwan Baan.

Cheers TES


I have the impression that in Europe they like the natural style better and in USA they like
the more artificial style more.
Unfortuantly I live in Europe  :D.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on February 28, 2013, 01:12:00 pm
I have the impression that in Europe they like the natural style better and in USA they like
the more artificial style more.
Unfortuantly I live in Europe  :D.



That has been true to some degree going way back to when film ruled this genre. But understand I do almost all my shooting in the US largely for US clients (I sell a lot of stock to overseas magazines) and my US clients by and large love that look these days. I gave a talk to the AIA here recently about recent trends in AP and showed some IB work and they flat out loved it. Here is what one high profile architect client wrote me after the talk:


Insightful talk yesterday. Iwan Baan’s work is simply terrific – I checked out his website and recognized some of the images – thank you for the tip!

 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: tesfoto on February 28, 2013, 03:52:57 pm
That has been true to some degree going way back to when film ruled this genre. But understand I do almost all my shooting in the US largely for US clients (I sell a lot of stock to overseas magazines) and my US clients by and large love that look these days. I gave a talk to the AIA here recently about recent trends in AP and showed some IB work and they flat out loved it. Here is what one high profile architect client wrote me after the talk:


Insightful talk yesterday. Iwan Baan’s work is simply terrific – I checked out his website and recognized some of the images – thank you for the tip!

 



One of his secret it that he only shoots very good architecture, he turns down assignments if he does not like the architecture or architect. That is also part of his trademark, architects should be almost grateful if he chose to photograph their building. He gets hyped by architects and is very difficult to access or assign, and then they want him even more, to the point that only IB can photograph this building.

I like his work very much, he is a very good photographer and I also think he is very clever in his business strategy too.

I think it was like having your portrait made by Avedon or Penn, and then you were somebody ;-)







Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on February 28, 2013, 04:30:03 pm
Very interesting info. Thanks.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: TMARK on February 28, 2013, 05:34:48 pm
I wouldn't chase IB's style.  I think it is more than fad, but if its not you then leave it be.

I love it, by the way.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: alan_b on February 28, 2013, 08:30:55 pm
The talk about IB emphasizes the point that the best equipment is what fits with your working style.  Technical differences between the two cameras you have are less significant.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Steve Hendrix on February 28, 2013, 09:11:32 pm
Hi

I have started to do some architectural / interior photography and love it.

Are there any architectural / interior photographers here that can
give some advice to what kind of equipment that is best suited?

I have a Nikon D800E and a Contax645/P65+.

Is a tech camera the best route or is there other options that are "better"?

I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past.

Hopefully some of you guys can give me some good advice.

Thanks

Willow




I'm not an architectural photographer (hope you don't mind). But I have many architectural clients and a pretty wide view of many segments of the industry, through the eyes and experiences of our many amazing photographic clients.

Since you already have a D800 and a P65+, my assumption would be that you already utilize both where they are appropriate. And if you do so, then that is pretty typical of our clients, nearly all of whom shoot with medium format digital products, but - importantly - not exclusively. Often volume requirements and production schedules negate the slower process of shooting medium format and 35mm is the better fit. You probably already know this.

Also, your architectural options for your D800 are pretty straightforward - get tilt/shift lenses.

As far as your P65+ is concerned, my feeling is you're generally thinking along the right path in that technical cameras are your most obvious extension for architectural use. There are other choices, like the Hartblei solution, toting a small view camera, etc, but the overwhelming majority of our clients who shoot architecture with medium format digital backs (and this includes Hedrik Blessing) utilize technical cameras.

Pretty simply, it is an advantage to being able to correct perspective, and technical cameras do this easily and in a very small and lightweight package. Considering the larger, well, everything of medium format, this is a benefit. Shooting architecture with a technical camera is a slower process, and it is also an expensive one. There are some great lenses for this type of work - Rodenstock 32mm, Schneider 43mm, to name a few, and they are expensive. But when used appropriately, they deliver great image quality and when you're looking at what you captured, they never disappoint.

I think when users are pushing you toward 35mm, they feel like they're giving you good advice. You can get results close to medium format, and you can do it more productively and less expensively. The biggest advantages 35mm offers are more production. Less Expensive. But I ask you, whoever said that was the essence of photography? It's your money, spend it how you like. Make yourself happy. If you like shooting fewer photographs, make them better ones.

Just because some great architectural photographers shoot 35mm, that doesn't mean you shouldn't also take heart from the many others who also shoot medium format digital with a technical camera.

Best of luck to you. Remember - after all, your task is to thrill clients. But that starts with thrilling yourself. Do what you like.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 01, 2013, 12:06:24 am

I think when users are pushing you toward 35mm, they feel like they're giving you good advice. You can get results close to medium format, and you can do it more productively and less expensively.
The biggest advantages 35mm offers are more production. Less Expensive. But I ask you, whoever said that was the essence of photography?

Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration

The essence of photography is what you do with the subject. When quality levels are so high as they are today with both high end 35mm DSLRs and MF digital
the difference in quality is less relevant.
Now that the quality of both systems exceeds what clients need a system that is more productive, faster and less expensive to buy and maintain
is the best choice.
On top of that the both the financial and time resources that are freed up by this choice can be put into the content
of the image.
A more productive and efficient system lets you concentrate more on the subject and variations around your concept and approach.

Just looking at live view over HDMI while moving people and things around when shooting staged interiors is so helpful, especially hen you need the camera right up against
the wall to covr the view you want.

Wireless live view when sending your camera up on a pole....

The essence of photography is not about ultra HiFi and ultra+a-bit-more HiFi. It's about content, style, mood and light.

Clients, at least the big ones don't need to be thrilled. They work with the best as a norm, so it's not really thrilling. It's meeting the high standard they want.
Image quality is there with both high end 35mm DSLR and MF. Clients standards are met through content and making the process of getting the images
as little as possible like pulling teeth.

Having a small footprint/treading lightly as a photographer is also important. Many time with corporate, industrial and private clients the sooner you are done the better.
It can cost more than the photographers fee to make a facility, building or luxury available for photography, sometimes 10 fold.

You can rest assured that a significant part of  Iwan Baan's success if from his small agile kit and small footprint... he treads lightly and most likely gets great access as a result.





Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 01, 2013, 02:34:04 am

"One of his secret it that he only shoots very good architecture, he turns down assignments if he does not like the architecture or architect."

testfoto, you are right. I always feel, it´s is very easy to take good photos of good architecture - but much more difficult to take good images of uninteresting architecture (which is something one finds himself doing from time to time, if thats buys your bread and butter).
I don´t want to imagine his photos of mediocre architecture.

to see some strong architecture images have a look at http://www.brigidagonzalez.de (http://www.brigidagonzalez.de)/ and particularly the "3Dminus1" gallery. really breathtaking images!





Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: torger on March 01, 2013, 03:54:48 am
Really impressive images of Brigida González there, also like Iwan Baan's work. For that style I would choose a 135 system. However, I think the style requires a strong artistic talent and great confidence to become really good, so if it's not you it is hard style to take on. It also does not actually document the space that well, it's more about mood, so it depends on what the client wants. Someone may be offended but I think the more traditional strict style (where I would prefer a tech cam) has a stronger craft element to it, which makes it easier to learn and become good at.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 01, 2013, 05:16:00 am
so it depends on what the client wants.

I am just guessing, but I would imagine, the architects (like hadid...) commission the usual suspects /trad. AP to get the new building documented properly - and only as a interessting supplement/experiment get them then done from somebody like Baan in a different style. But as I said - that just a guess.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: bcooter on March 01, 2013, 05:48:45 am

It must be nice to be 100% sure of everything.

Sure that the only digital camera you need is a 35mm nikon, sure of what constitutes commercial art, fine art, personal art.

Sure that that no client can tell the difference between a Nikon or a tech camera, or for that matter any camera.

Sure that interesting imagery requires a "small footprint".

Sure that spending half your online time dissing a brand and a camera format to suit some kind of strange purpose is actually interesting.

Me, I'm not really sure about anything.  Other than I know the more I offer, the more complete my production company, the deeper my investment, pre production, on set  production, post production not only doesn't go unnoticed, it secures me work.

Why . . . because that's what clients say.

I look at Chris Barrett's work and I know that when I was an Art Director and if I was commissioning an architectural photographer, Chris would be high on my list.  Because he can shoot straight angles, make exact but beautiful colors, show my building, my product in a professional atmosphere that looks better than "real" life.

As an Art Director I usually found it's a lot easier for someone like Chris to shoot  highly commercial images, then let loose, let a few bystanders amble on through a image, walk around and hand hold a camera AND still give me two styles of imagery,  than it is for  someone with a photojournalistic background to multitask and shoot detailed commercial imagery.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think I  know that why I like working a medium format file more than a 35mm file and I could explain it but it just opens up another chance for someone that's "sure" to try and prove me wrong.

Actually I am sure of one thing. 

If I respect someone's work, I respect their way of doing it. 

If Chris shot everything with an old polaroid I'd respect that.

Along with Chris, one of  best architectural photographers I know shoots most of his imagery with medium format backs and tech cameras.

http://www.timgriffith.com 

One of the  best car photographers I've seen not only shoots with a Hasselblad, shoots 35mm, does cgi and also owns three amazing production vehicles for producing still and motion.

http://www.filmo-usa.com/    http://damonproductions.com/main.html

All three of these people come to the project prepared and with serious investment.

Or as Steve says, maybe they just like to use the cameras they want to use.


IMO

BC
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Steve Hendrix on March 01, 2013, 08:43:39 am
The essence of photography is what you do with the subject. When quality levels are so high as they are today with both high end 35mm DSLRs and MF digital
the difference in quality is less relevant.
Now that the quality of both systems exceeds what clients need a system that is more productive, faster and less expensive to buy and maintain
is the best choice.
On top of that the both the financial and time resources that are freed up by this choice can be put into the content
of the image.
A more productive and efficient system lets you concentrate more on the subject and variations around your concept and approach.

Just looking at live view over HDMI while moving people and things around when shooting staged interiors is so helpful, especially hen you need the camera right up against
the wall to covr the view you want.

Wireless live view when sending your camera up on a pole....

The essence of photography is not about ultra HiFi and ultra+a-bit-more HiFi. It's about content, style, mood and light.

Clients, at least the big ones don't need to be thrilled. They work with the best as a norm, so it's not really thrilling. It's meeting the high standard they want.
Image quality is there with both high end 35mm DSLR and MF. Clients standards are met through content and making the process of getting the images
as little as possible like pulling teeth.

Having a small footprint/treading lightly as a photographer is also important. Many time with corporate, industrial and private clients the sooner you are done the better.
It can cost more than the photographers fee to make a facility, building or luxury available for photography, sometimes 10 fold.

You can rest assured that a significant part of  Iwan Baan's success if from his small agile kit and small footprint... he treads lightly and most likely gets great access as a result.








I think you mis-managed my point, concerning essence. I never said the essence of photography was ultra hi fi. I only said it was not producing more shots for less expense. My point was that none of this is really the essence of photography. And that is pretty much all I meant. And it was intended seriously, but also whimsically, from the perspective of the importance of throwing the rule book out.

You also miss my point about thrills. If the photographer isn't thrilled, the client won't be in most cases, either. Or at least, not as much.

Finally, your point about Iwan Baan's success is noted. His success is perhaps partly from his small, agile kit and footprint. But this is about someone else. The thread wasn't started by Iwan Baan. While some of the input on what Willow should shoot with is useful, most of it neglects the main subject, seems to ignore the equipment he already owns, as well as the questions he's actually asked. It makes me wonder why photographers would seem so intent on putting someone in a box (their box).

If the idea of shooting architecture with a P65+ (which he already owns) and a technical camera was so outrageous, then you would be acting as a good samaritan. But the fact that many successful photographers (well, besides Iwaan Baak), do use medium format digital with technical cameras for architecture work, makes me question the dogma.


Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 01, 2013, 09:30:59 am
I look at this with shooting styles and what you are willing to make sacrifices on.  Iwan Baan's shooting style means that the best camera system for him is a DSLR.  But what about those who shoot slow and methodical, in that case a Tech Camera is the best solution.  You can lie to yourself or say yes, but DSLRs do the trick as well for less money.  

But I ask, if you are so content to sacrifice here, where does it end.  Are you now more likely to sacrifice with the amount of lighting you need,  or the staging, or getting the best composition?  I think eventually yes; life wears you down and if you allow that mind set to develop, it will rule you.  The best shooters I look at all shoot with the best cameras for their style.  (Look at Chris, he does not make a living from shooting video and already owned a 5D II, but he bought a Red.  Why, because it is the best.)  Sure, no client will ever tell the difference, but they have that mind set of never compromising regardless of how small the issue is.  Maybe that is why they are the best, because of that mindset.  

Personally I never want to get into the mind set of settling for good enough.  I know I would never want someone to look at my work and say "he is good enough."
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on March 01, 2013, 10:17:31 am
One more time, thanks for all the good input here.

I read it and process it.

Iwan Baan's work doesnt speak to me, but Chris Barrett's does.

Thats important to me when I choose witch path to go.
Maybe Chris could use 35mm and shoot the same pictures that speaks to me.
I do not know - yet.

I think I have to try the different approaches and see what suits me.

And when it comes to Fred.... I do not read his posts anymore.
In the beginning ( some months ago ) they were read with interest.
Now it is just noise/propaganda.

Its sad because I think he has a lot of knowledge and experience.



Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: TMARK on March 01, 2013, 10:34:01 am
I look at this with shooting styles and what you are willing to make sacrifices on.  Iwan Baan's shooting style means that the best camera system for him is a DSLR.  But what about those who shoot slow and methodical, in that case a Tech Camera is the best solution.  You can lie to yourself or say yes, but DSLRs do the trick as well for less money.  

But I ask, if you are so content to sacrifice here, where does it end.  Are you now more likely to sacrifice with the amount of lighting you need,  or the staging, or getting the best composition?  I think eventually yes; life wears you down and if you allow that mind set to develop, it will rule you.  The best shooters I look at all shoot with the best cameras for their style.  (Look at Chris, he does not make a living from shooting video and already owned a 5D II, but he bought a Red.  Why, because it is the best.)  Sure, no client will ever tell the difference, but they have that mind set of never compromising regardless of how small the issue is.  Maybe that is why they are the best, because of that mindset.  

Personally I never want to get into the mind set of settling for good enough.  I know I would never want someone to look at my work and say "he is good enough."

This is true.  You have to approach every job with the intention to make the best image possible, even if the client doesn't know or understand th difference.  This means using the best gear that enables you to get the shot and within production costraints, be it an Arca and an IQ180 or an FM2.  Even when the client doesn't care. 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: TMARK on March 01, 2013, 10:39:14 am

Maybe Chris could use 35mm and shoot the same pictures that speaks to me.
I do not know - yet.


I think he could, its just not how he works.  I don't think using a D800 would benefit him over his Phase/Arca set up, from what I understand of his working process.  And that is what it comes down to, whether the benefits of using a DSLR with live view and ease of set up would in practice benefit someone like Chris. 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: pixjohn on March 01, 2013, 02:59:15 pm
I shoot 98% my architectural projects  DB/Tech camera and maybe 2% with a Nikon.  Since you already own a P65 and Nikon, you are the best person to do a test. Rent a Cambo or other camera  and see how you like the work flow. I come from shooting 4x5 and 8x10 and like the slower workflow of a tech camera. I just hate all the bugs I have had to deal with over the years. Plenty of high end architectural shooters shoot with canon/nikon and some with digital backs.  My original post was more about someone starting out, but you already have a big part of the investment.

I see the style of architectural photography changing to more available light, because of budget more then anything else.

It also depends on the tyoe of work you shoot? Interior rooms? Exterior only? Dusk shots?  people posted lots of samples but very little was interior rooms. How many shots in a day?

Lots of variables and no correct answer.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ChristopherBarrett on March 01, 2013, 03:18:34 pm
Thanks for the kind words, people.  To add my own thoughts to the pile...  I think it all comes down to your methodology.  For some people, it's thrilling to run around a building grabbing snapshots then editing them down to a collection of keepers.  For me, it's all about crafting the images rather than capturing them.  If you take the time to develop the necessary skills and experience, there are things you can do with lighting that can never be done with retouching.  That's why I check 600lbs of gear onto every flight I take.  Since we take our time on set with every photograph, there's no reason for me to use a fast camera.  And if I'm going to spend a minimum of two hours creating every image I shoot, you can bet your ass I'm going to capture it with the best gear I can lay my hands on.  This is how I work... it's not for everybody.  I can afford great gear, I dig cameras... there ya go.

There's no reason I couldn't shoot everything with a DSLR, it wouldn't affect my process.  I basically work from the laptop, the display screen has replaced the ground glass.  I just find it a pain in the ass composing without independent x and y shifts.  There also seem to be so few lens options.  Then you have the Canon <> Nikon issue.  The D800 has a great sensor but Canon has the good Tilt/Shifts.  What the hell Nikon???  Make a goddamn 17mm!

To simplify all the bullshit above:  If you need to work fast, untethered and travel light use a DSLR.  If you have the luxury or working slower, want the best quality you can buy and can pay cash for it, go tech cam.

CB
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on March 01, 2013, 06:58:20 pm
Thanks for the kind words, people.  To add my own thoughts to the pile...  I think it all comes down to your methodology.  For some people, it's thrilling to run around a building grabbing snapshots then editing them down to a collection of keepers.  For me, it's all about crafting the images rather than capturing them.  If you take the time to develop the necessary skills and experience, there are things you can do with lighting that can never be done with retouching.  That's why I check 600lbs of gear onto every flight I take.  Since we take our time on set with every photograph, there's no reason for me to use a fast camera.  And if I'm going to spend a minimum of two hours creating every image I shoot, you can bet your ass I'm going to capture it with the best gear I can lay my hands on.  This is how I work... it's not for everybody.  I can afford great gear, I dig cameras... there ya go.

There's no reason I couldn't shoot everything with a DSLR, it wouldn't affect my process.  I basically work from the laptop, the display screen has replaced the ground glass.  I just find it a pain in the ass composing without independent x and y shifts.  There also seem to be so few lens options.  Then you have the Canon <> Nikon issue.  The D800 has a great sensor but Canon has the good Tilt/Shifts.  What the hell Nikon???  Make a goddamn 17mm!

To simplify all the bullshit above:  If you need to work fast, untethered and travel light use a DSLR.  If you have the luxury or working slower, want the best quality you can buy and can pay cash for it, go tech cam.

CB


Chris, what lenses do you use with your P65+?
What lens do you use most?

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ChristopherBarrett on March 01, 2013, 07:08:56 pm
Schneider 35 (has about 10mm of usable shift) I should probably replace this with the 32mm HR-W, but it's a lot of cash for a focal length I don't even like
Schneider 43 (has maybe 14mm of usable shift)  about 85% of my work on this glass
Rodenstock 55, 70HR-W, 90HR-W  (all these have more shift available than the RM3D can do)

Even the 35 feels too wide for most of my work but on the rare occasion that I need even more, I'll do the 5d2 17mm TS-E.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on March 01, 2013, 07:19:29 pm
Thanx for the answer.
Why did you end up with Arca Swiss in stead of Cambo or Alpa?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ChristopherBarrett on March 02, 2013, 10:41:31 am
Well, I've used Arcas for over 20 years...  
F Line 4x5
F Line Metric 6x9
F Line C 6x9
M Line 2 6x9

yada yada

I have the M Line 2 now and I can swap lenses back and forth with the Rm3d.  I can also mount my DSLR on the M2 for long lens stuff.  I use the M2 with my 135mm and 180mm.  
No sliding back on Alpas.  I like sliding backs.  
The Rm3d focus system has about 7 times the resolution of the Alpa focus system.  Also, since the Arca focus is on the body, not the lens... it seems that whenever I'm changing lenses on interiors I never have to change focus... unless it's a big jump in focal length.  
Built in tilt.  
Modularity and access to the humongous Arca system.
Cheaper than Alpa

If you haven't already seen my Rm3d blog post...  http://christopherbarrett.net/blog/?p=1350 (http://christopherbarrett.net/blog/?p=1350)

The Alpas are beautiful and I love them.  If the Rm3d didn't exist, I'd be shooting an Alpa.  The Cambo is... um... not an Arca or Alpa.

CB
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ACH DIGITAL on March 02, 2013, 11:48:39 am
Thanks for sharing Chris. Important thoughts coming from experience.
One thing I might add. When you intent to work slow or craft the image as you mention, one have to have the train eye and confidence to stick to that angle and composition. ACH
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 02, 2013, 01:56:55 pm

I see the style of architectural photography changing to more available light, because of budget more then anything else.


I think it has more to do with a tendency for architects to show how their work looks like in reality.
How the structure looks in the natural light that is in in the real world. How structure are designed to
live in natural light is very important and IMO it's more important to showcase that natural look.
Many architects go to great lengths to include lighting design in their work. Both how natural lights flows
over their designs and how the building own lighting (artificial) looks.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 02, 2013, 02:34:39 pm
I think it has more to do with a tendency for architects to show how their work looks like in reality.
How the structure looks in the natural light that is in in the real world. How structure are designed to
live in natural light is very important and IMO it's more important to showcase that natural look.
Many architects go to great lengths to include lighting design in their work. Both how natural lights flows
over their designs and how the building own lighting (artificial) looks.
I have to ask how many architects do you work with on a regular basis?  How many of them do you pick their brain about lighting?  Because many architects I have spoken to about lighting do not really understand how it works.  I work with a few lighting designers in NYC and Philadelphia and all have told me that they have never worked with an architect that really understood lighting.  

Additionally, there are several different lighting styles.  Some people light a shot and you know it was lit, but still looks awesome.  Then some, like me, strive to light the interior to show space and form but in a way that it does not look lit.  I know another photographer in my area that lights his images so the colors pop (he use to be a painter) but does not look unnatural.  

Sorry to the others reading this, but I am getting annoyed at the implication that there is only one true style to shoot with, that the only way is with small fast cameras, no lights and a ton of time spent in post making the image look good.  

Is it just more, or do others hate sitting in front of a computer as much as I do and would rather be on my feet getting it done on location.  
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: adammork on March 02, 2013, 03:18:00 pm
This is very depending on your location - here in Scandinavia and for most part in Europe, if you photograph directly for the architect and you lit the space in the traditional American way - that could be your last asignment for that architect - and for a good reason IMO.

I'm an architect by training so I always try to be faithful to the space I'm photographing - and since space are created with light and shadow, I find it to be the architects job to light it through daylight and/or artificial light - it's my choice of timing that can make my images different from others - and you can say that I'm "lighting" the space that way - but I'm not adding more light than already been given to me by the architect - It's now up to me to get the best out of it.

It's impressive too add 100 lights and controlling them technical perfect - but from my point of view as an architect, it's like turning architectural photography in to product photography - and make architecture looks like perfect beautiful images of jewels in a catalogue.

You can not find a single image on my web site with additional lighting from my hand, beside carefully timing of the day....

But as said before it's a cultural thing.

/adam
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: tesfoto on March 02, 2013, 04:30:26 pm

Iwan Baan's work doesnt speak to me, but Chris Barrett's does.


Good for you, then you know what to do. I have the opposite opinion, perfection bores the hell out of me.

For some people, it's thrilling to run around a building grabbing snapshots then editing them down to a collection of keepers.  For me, it's all about crafting the images rather than capturing them.  If you take the time to develop the necessary skills and experience, there are things you can do with lighting that can never be done with retouching.  That's why I check 600lbs of gear onto every flight I take.  Since we take our time on set with every photograph, there's no reason for me to use a fast camera.  And if I'm going to spend a minimum of two hours creating every image I shoot, you can bet your ass I'm going to capture it with the best gear I can lay my hands on.  This is how I work... it's not for everybody.  I can afford great gear, I dig cameras... there ya go.

Well I am not impressed by your work (sorry to be so frank, but I think you also just insulted Iwan Baan), for me it does not have any kind of poetry, it looks more like a rendering - much too perfect, too little feeling. I think IB is crafting his images too, he just works faster.

I have to ask how many architects do you work with on a regular basis?   

So what, FredBGG have some very valid points, that might conflict with your ideal.

Because many architects I have spoken to about lighting do not really understand how it works.  I work with a few lighting designers in NYC and Philadelphia and all have told me that they have never worked with an architect that really understood lighting.  

Many more Architects would argue that lighting designers, never understood the concept of architecture and natural lighting ;-)


This is very depending on your location - here in Scandinavia and for most part in Europe, if you photograph directly for the architect and you lit the space in the traditional American way - that could be your last asignment for that architect - and for a good reason IMO.

Yes - Correct, IMO too

You can not find a single image on my web site with additional lighting from my hand, beside carefully timing of the day....

Impressive work........

Cheers

TES


Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: rethmeier on March 02, 2013, 04:45:57 pm
Being based in Australia, I have to agree with Adam Mork.
There is a difference in what clients want and get in the USA versus Europe and Australia.
I use either no extra lighting or very little.
Also,for what I shoot I've been using a DSLR for the last 7 years.
Before that I used a Fuji 680  and before that Mamiya and before that Hasselblad and Sinars with roll film holders.
I would shoot color neg and scan the film on my Imacon scanner.

I have a feeling that the budgets are much larger in the USA.
Hence taking 300 pounds of lighting gear on a plane like CB.

Anyway,at the end of the day,whatever works for you and you get repeat work you must be on the right track.

Happy shooting!
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MrSmith on March 02, 2013, 05:51:37 pm
I like CB's work because it doesn't look lit. I don't care how long or how many lights it took, but I can't see U.K. Budgets covering that kind of set-up from speaking to the few architectural photographers I know and the interior/furniture clients I have with similar budgets.
There's Definately a difference in approach and budgets between U.S and Europe.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: rethmeier on March 02, 2013, 06:27:40 pm
Correct!
Chris Barrett images don't look lit, I never said they did.
He carefully lights each image he shoots and he does it very well.
In the nineties when I was shooting hotel interiors, I did light them as well and I probably still would if I had that sort of work.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: rethmeier on March 02, 2013, 06:57:17 pm
I have to agree with you Johannes!

Also it's much harder to photograph an un-photogenic structure than something that inspires you.

I think that's why IB chooses his clients and knocks back jobs he doesn't find interesting or to say it bluntly,
not worth shooting or to hard to get some good images.

Cheers,
Willem.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: erstwhile on March 02, 2013, 08:36:43 pm
That's why I check 600lbs of gear onto every flight I take. 

Dang.

Let's see: from Delta Airline's (just an arbitrary airline) current charges:

Bags 4-10: 200 USD each (each way; 10's the max per person)

Restrictions:
weigh 50 pounds (23 kg) or less
not exceed 62 inches (157 cm) when you total length + width + height

Overage Charges (each way, PER weight OR size):
90 USD/CAD* for bags weighing 51-70 lbs.
175 USD/CAD* for bags weighing 71-100 lbs.
Bags exceeding 100 lbs. are not allowed.

So reading the post literally ("I check"), that would be 10 x 60lb bags, assuming they all fit within the dimensions (which they most likely don't). So, 10 bags @ $200 each, plus 10 overweight at $90 each = $2900 each way. So $5800 total round trip, for the checked bags.

More realistically, let's assume the load is distributed across at least the photographer and one assistant. So that would be 12 x 50lb bags, which is still $200 x 12 = $2400 each way, or $4800 round trip.

That's without counting the overage charges for exceeding size limits (things like stands and booms eat up those inches really quickly). Of course, maybe other airlines have cheaper rates, or maybe there's some special VIP membership with better deals or whatever. But still, damn. Nearly $5k per job just for baggage charges.




Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 03, 2013, 12:15:31 am
Dang.

Let's see: from Delta Airline's (just an arbitrary airline) current charges:

Bags 4-10: 200 USD each (each way; 10's the max per person)

Restrictions:
weigh 50 pounds (23 kg) or less
not exceed 62 inches (157 cm) when you total length + width + height

Overage Charges (each way, PER weight OR size):
90 USD/CAD* for bags weighing 51-70 lbs.
175 USD/CAD* for bags weighing 71-100 lbs.
Bags exceeding 100 lbs. are not allowed.

So reading the post literally ("I check"), that would be 10 x 60lb bags, assuming they all fit within the dimensions (which they most likely don't). So, 10 bags @ $200 each, plus 10 overweight at $90 each = $2900 each way. So $5800 total round trip, for the checked bags.

More realistically, let's assume the load is distributed across at least the photographer and one assistant. So that would be 12 x 50lb bags, which is still $200 x 12 = $2400 each way, or $4800 round trip.

That's without counting the overage charges for exceeding size limits (things like stands and booms eat up those inches really quickly). Of course, maybe other airlines have cheaper rates, or maybe there's some special VIP membership with better deals or whatever. But still, damn. Nearly $5k per job just for baggage charges.






You forgot to work media rates into the equation.
$50 per item even if very large.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: georgem on March 03, 2013, 05:56:11 am
[...] space are created with light and shadow, I find it to be the architects job to light it through daylight and/or artificial light [...]

But as said before it's a cultural thing.

/adam

Agreed. I think european architecture puts strong emphasis on the play of natural day light on surfaces and volumes. Maybe Le Corbusier's legacy, in a way. And, at least in southern europe, buildings -from the vernacular to the contemporary- cannot be fully comprehended, unless one also sees their shadows and their progress throughout the day. So, a fully lit photograph is not the "right" thing to do. The architects I work with totally expect midday exterior shots, with sunlight casting very dark shadows, as long as the shadows are integral to the architecture.

It seems to me that most of american architectural photography is about interior and dusk exterior shots. And nothing wrong with that -it's a cultural thing, as you said.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: bcooter on March 03, 2013, 07:01:42 am
Baggage overage in the U.S. fluctuates.

Saying production rate out of LA, usually will give you more weight, also paying with a airline credit card adds one extra bag.  There are other ways to add more free baggage, but everything is dependent on the airlines and the city.

Upgrading to first or Business class helps and speeds the airport check in time considerably.

Also if you travel between certain cities regularly, knowing a few skycaps that understand what you do, will help as they'll run interference for you at check in.

Out of LA, just about all the major carriers accept the production rate.  I mostly fly American Air and they accept production rates  in and out of Kennedy and Newark, Miami, DFW and sometimes Chicago.

Continental (now united)  out of Newark won't accept the production rate, at least in my dozen times flying them.

In Europe and Asia it's a crap shoot, but usually the prices go up 4 to 10 times, depending on carrier, county, etc.

We've routinely have $500 fees domestically,  $1,200 overage fees in Europe, Asia can be almost double that.   

Baggage fees can seem excessive, especially if your moving 700 to 800 lbs of equipment, but rentals in Europe are high, rentals in some markets and almost impossible and knowing your equipment, knowing it's backed up and ready to go when you land, saves you days of production time and money.

With the compressed schedules we work, it's not unusual for us to fly for 12, to 14 hours, land and start working. 

Luckily I can sleep on almost any plane, even those rocking around areoflot flights in the winter.

Best thing is to check with every carrier, try to get something in writing and hold the carrier to it at time of check in, but your always at the mercy of the manager at the counter.

IMO

BC

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 03, 2013, 08:00:56 am


To simplify all the bullshit above:  If you need to work fast, untethered and travel light use a DSLR.  If you have the luxury or working slower, want the best quality you can buy and can pay cash for it, go tech cam.

CB

The wisest words in the entire thread in today's world.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Guy Mancuso on March 03, 2013, 09:56:53 am
Funny thing the Op is in the nice position to have a Nikon and a P65. Not sure what's the struggle here depending on how you shoot and given the requirements of your clients not to mention your style. All you really need here  for the p65 is a tech cam, one or two lenses. This is really not that expensive if you stay with a simple Cambo tech cam and a 35xl which is great on that sensor. That's a 5k investment or so. Myself ii would be using the tech cam and lights like I always do but that's the way I work. Frankly I would reach for the tech cam almost every time and its not as slow as people think either. This also depends a lot on budget and end use as well as to what you need to deliver. I do find the comments between Europe and US style very interesting though. Myself I use lights as some fill and highlight areas and blend with natural light but that is usually what my clients want. If you go the Nikon route your still going to need lenses for that as well , so need to figure out your ROI. Style and client needs. Have fun with your choices, but you do have the largest investment in your hands now. Take advantage of that.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: georgem on March 04, 2013, 05:23:31 am
.. however, there are obviously a lot more people out there than architects, who need interior type images produced to meet their usage requirements

That's why my advice is -hopefully- valid only if the OP is targeting architects, my experience in other areas is zero, ATM.

I very much enjoy looking at your work and the latest images you posted certainly look like you used shifts. Or are they crops? Also, your images in general do not have the extreme, weird-looking wide angle look that is so ubiquitous --care to shed some light on the lenses/equipment you use? Just to keep the thread on-topic  : ).
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on March 04, 2013, 06:18:19 am
Does a Contax 645 35mm and a SK 35mm or a Rodie 35mm for a tech camera have the same distortion?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 12, 2013, 04:45:12 am
Hi

I have started to do some architectural / interior photography and love it.

Are there any architectural / interior photographers here that can
give some advice to what kind of equipment that is best suited?

I have a Nikon D800E and a Contax645/P65+.

Is a tech camera the best route or is there other options that are "better"?

I only want advice from photographers who are doing this kind of work or has done it in the past.

Hopefully some of you guys can give me some good advice.

Thanks

Willow



Hi, I read all the posts and there is a lot of good info in them.

First off, to explain a bit where I am coming from, I graduated from Architecture (prof. degree) and worked with architects years ago but have been a professional photographer for about 10 years. I do quite a bit of architectural photography for design and construction professionals but also for manufacturers of building products even though the bulk of my work is for advertising campaigns for ad. agencies and mostly unrelated to architecture.

I get hired for architectural jobs a lot of times due to my background and knowledge in architecture. It helps greatly when communicating with professionals in the field. The quality and taste in my compositions and color is also a factor.

First off, never forget that you are providing a service and each client is different. Yes, there are some things that are shared between a lot of them but generally each one is unique. Great service is key. Another thing is perception. All these can be discussed at length but il stick to more technical aspects regarding camera equipment (not even gonna get much into lighting)

I personally do not like to get into supplemental lighting when photographing architecture mainly because it would be like designing a project onto a project. Its very expensive and time consuming. At least in my market, its unsustainable. In some interiors I might help existing lights with gels and some strobes but I avoid it since most projects have a lighting design already thats an integral part of the work.

With the Nikon D800/e and the P65+ you have everything you need from the image capture standpoint (sensor). Both have amazing dynamic range, resolution and color. I would just try some of the technical camera systems (body and lenses) available for the MFDB and decide on one. I think shift and tilt are almost indispensable tools to have in architectural photography where precise composition is key most times. Ultra wide angles is another capability that is required in a lot of shoots due to space constrains.


Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: sam@ on March 12, 2013, 06:24:15 am
Being based in Australia, I have to agree with Adam Mork.
There is a difference in what clients want and get in the USA versus Europe and Australia.
I use either no extra lighting or very little.
Also,for what I shoot I've been using a DSLR for the last 7 years.


Hi

I agree with Adam and Willem on this also - I have almost never lit images in 20 years.
The "American" style often looks overdone and a bit cheesy to me - but whatever the client wants!

RE Equipment:
I have been using Canon and the TSE lenses for a few years now (in the film days it was Horseman / Sinar etc).
I love the TSE lenses (don't love the 45mm) and especially love the live view.
I generally don't shoot tethered and like to move quickly on occasion when the light demands.
I sometimes stitch with a Hartblei tripod adaptor.
A higher MP camera could be useful - although the images produced by this set-up certainly work for most applications.

I have almost gone the tech cam route a couple of times. If budget was no issue I would have both.
I do like to be able to see through the lens and really finely adjust the compositions that way.

I have a query RE Hasselblad:
Is anyone using H3D or H4D seriously for architecture with the HTS 1.5 and the 28mm and the new 24mm lenses?
I haven't used a digital Blad but am I right in thinking the software will correct the distortions in the 24mm and 28mm lenses?
If so which camera / lens combos are you using?

Just wondering if that might be an option to see through the lens with a 50mp - 60mp sensor and also use the back on a tech cam in future if that happens.

Thanks

Sam




Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 12, 2013, 09:32:57 am
Of course I'm with Ashley on this.  He's an exceptional photographer and though our visions are worlds apart I really appreciate his sensitivity towards lighting.  I respect everyone who embraces their craft.  I personally feel that as photographers and craftsmen, to summarily dismiss the use of supplemental lighting is irresponsible.  Half of every photograph is light!  Whether the light is existing or supplemental, your understanding of and sensitivity towards the luminance of any environment will develop at an exponential rate if you can create some light yourself and measure it's impact.  If you never experiment with light then you retard your own growth and comprehension of it's very nature.

Sometimes the best lighting you can do is none at all, when the ambient is just perfect.  I don't feel that you'll be educated enough to make that call, though, until you have learned something about lighting.

I could go on and on but I think this is going to call for a new thread with examples and clarification.

On a side note... if the "European" approach is all natural and excludes supplemental lighting then why does all the best lighting equipment come from Europe?

CB
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: sam@ on March 12, 2013, 09:50:25 am
Hi

I hope that my comment re using additional lighting in Architecture is not taken as dismissive or criticising - it was not intended that way.

I have no problem with people lighting stuff as they wish and as I said it's great if your clients like that.
If I was doing work like Ashley I probably would use it also..

I happen to love using set-up light! (strobe or flash as I call it) with all the attachments and shapers etc. - I do this every week in my other commercial work, but not really in architectural work.

Best regards

Sam
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 12, 2013, 10:09:52 am
Sam... I think it also has a lot to do with your subject matter.  Most of Iwan Bann's work, for example, are of large public spaces.  I would never attempt to "light" that sort of environment.  We have to be sensitive to our subjects, our client's needs and our own visions.  I shoot primarily commercial interiors.  My client's work is all in the details of the textures of materials, the reflectivity of certain elements and the very specific color palette.  All of these are at least as important as the shape of the space.  You can almost never describe all of those elements accurately with existing lighting.  

This argument seems to be based upon generalities with all of us coming from very different perspectives.  In the end it's really kind of silly.  I do feel strongly, though, that to undermine the significance of lighting to new photographers (many of them reading these posts) is a great disservice to them and all future photographers.  Digital capture seems to breed laziness and retouching is replacing dedication to craft.  I have been criticized for the pursuit of perfection.  As an architectural photographer, if you're not constantly pursuing the perfect image then you're just not doing your job.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: sam@ on March 12, 2013, 10:41:07 am
Thanks Chris - I agree with much of that

Best regards

Sam
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: David Eichler on March 17, 2013, 07:37:09 am
An example of an american architectural photographer who says he uses no supplementary lighting: http://scottfrances.com/

Personally, even if there are limitations of budget or logistics, it seems to me that having at least a small amount of compact, inexpensive lighting equipment at hand can be useful for some situations.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 17, 2013, 12:36:48 pm
Funny thing the Op is in the nice position to have a Nikon and a P65. Not sure what's the struggle here depending on how you shoot and given the requirements of your clients not to mention your style. All you really need here  for the p65 is a tech cam, one or two lenses. This is really not that expensive if you stay with a simple Cambo tech cam and a 35xl which is great on that sensor. That's a 5k investment or so. Myself ii would be using the tech cam and lights like I always do but that's the way I work. Frankly I would reach for the tech cam almost every time and its not as slow as people think either. This also depends a lot on budget and end use as well as to what you need to deliver. I do find the comments between Europe and US style very interesting though. Myself I use lights as some fill and highlight areas and blend with natural light but that is usually what my clients want. If you go the Nikon route your still going to need lenses for that as well , so need to figure out your ROI. Style and client needs. Have fun with your choices, but you do have the largest investment in your hands now. Take advantage of that.

A couple of lenses for architecture?
Architecture involves shooting subjects with space limitation and dimensions that nearly always cannot be changed.
Hallways, stairwells, walk in closets, bathrooms. A building in the middle of other buildings.
Only two lenses is not a realistic option for a full fledged Architectural photographer.
For some situations a great wide angle zoom is very useful even if lens corrections are needed in post.

The first step in the ROI logic is getting the subject into the frame.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 17, 2013, 01:14:44 pm
A couple of lenses for architecture?
Architecture involves shooting subjects with space limitation and dimensions that nearly always cannot be changed.
Hallways, stairwells, walk in closets, bathrooms. A building in the middle of other buildings.
Only two lenses is not a realistic option for a full fledged Architectural photographer.
For some situations a great wide angle zoom is very useful even if lens corrections are needed in post.

The first step in the ROI logic is getting the subject into the frame.



Although it would be great to have  5 or 6 or 8 lenses, realistically you will fall in love with one of them and shoot almost everything with that lens.  I remember once reading an essay by Jock Sturges where he said that for most shoots, he only brings one lens and one film type because it forces him to concentrate on the composition and light more.  Having too many lenses or film types only takes time away from composing the image because you now have to think about what lense should I use?

I think two lenses is more than enough to start with.  As long as you have a decently wide lens, no client is going to get annoyed.  None of my clients have a camera that even gets close enough to the width of a 35mm on a MF system, so they never complain that the shot is not wide enough.  Plus I hate going wide (or that wide) most of the time. 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 17, 2013, 01:44:45 pm
When we shot interiors with 4x5 film, I carried 8 lenses and used all of them.  Nowadays I carry 4 lenses with my Rm3d.  I also keep the 5d2 + 17mm TS-E on hand for extreme wide scenarios which are very rare.  I carry an adapted Leica zoom which is nice for little details, too.  I have another 3 (longer) lenses for the view camera that only come out on furniture shoots.

So, even though I actually have several lenses, as Joe suggested, I shoot about 80% of my work with just one (in my case the 43mm).  When you have a high MP back, cropping in 15% or 20% is not an issue and allows bigger focal length gaps.

I don't find the Nikon particularly suitable for architecture.  Mind you I actually prefer Nikons and really miss my D3... but you just don't don't have the tilt/shift capabilities.  They have no 17mm and what lenses they do have constrain the tilt to a single axis.  Lame.  Canon's 17 & 24 with their independently rotating tilt and shift are far more useful and that 24 is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever seen.

Yada yada, etc, etc...
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: David Eichler on March 17, 2013, 02:08:39 pm
.. why add to them by pointing out your own limitations, before you know what the actually budget or logistics are.

In a previous comment someone mentioned small client budgets as a reason that they don't use supplementary lighting. I am trying to say that no budget is too small (at least anything that is even worth considering shooting for) that someone can't bring a few small flashes or inexpensive halogen lights for at least occasional use.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 17, 2013, 02:15:27 pm
When we shot interiors with 4x5 film, I carried 8 lenses and used all of them.  Nowadays I carry 4 lenses with my Rm3d.  I also keep the 5d2 + 17mm TS-E on hand for extreme wide scenarios which are very rare.  I carry an adapted Leica zoom which is nice for little details, too.  I have another 3 (longer) lenses for the view camera that only come out on furniture shoots.

So, even though I actually have several lenses, as Joe suggested, I shoot about 80% of my work with just one (in my case the 43mm).  When you have a high MP back, cropping in 15% or 20% is not an issue and allows bigger focal length gaps.

I don't find the Nikon particularly suitable for architecture.  Mind you I actually prefer Nikons and really miss my D3... but you just don't don't have the tilt/shift capabilities.  They have no 17mm and what lenses they do have constrain the tilt to a single axis.  Lame.  Canon's 17 & 24 with their independently rotating tilt and shift are far more useful and that 24 is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever seen.

Yada yada, etc, etc...

Chris, what case do you use to carry everything?  Is it a Pelican 1510? 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 17, 2013, 02:30:41 pm
Pelican 1600's for hotlights and grip (http://www.casesbypelican.com/app-1600.htm)  Cheap and decent protection and weight.
Versaflex MU 1724's for strobe and HMI (http://www.versa-flex.com/casesbags/multiuseformatcases.html)  Like Lightware on steroids.  Awesome protection.

(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/35693_1467567724236_6884379_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 17, 2013, 03:06:05 pm
I really need to start looking into cargo vans... but we have become most adept at minivan Tetris

(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/424772_4386536176623_2090759683_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Willow Photography on March 17, 2013, 03:37:16 pm
Thank you for keeping this thread alive  :).

One question:

does a Contax 645 35mm distort more than a tech camera 35mm??

anyone??

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 17, 2013, 04:32:46 pm
I really need to start looking into cargo vans... but we have become most adept at minivan Tetris



I'm really ready to dump the minivan and get a cargo...like the Nissan NV

http://www.nissancommercialvehicles.com/nv?tool=global.nv.link

I've whittled it down to strobe, I need to leave the hot lights at home....

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 17, 2013, 04:36:07 pm
The rest

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 17, 2013, 04:59:28 pm
Chris, I should have been more specific.  I meant what case do you use for your camera?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 17, 2013, 05:09:50 pm
I use the case that came from Phase One with the 645DF.  Put some thick dividers in there from my LightWare cases.  It's a Storm case and pretty much the same as the Pelican Rollaboard (1510).
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 17, 2013, 05:11:50 pm
I really need to start looking into cargo vans... but we have become most adept at minivan Tetris

(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/424772_4386536176623_2090759683_n.jpg)

Man that roller stand looks like a great "spear" on a hard stop or crash....
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Doug Peterson on March 17, 2013, 07:20:31 pm
does a Contax 645 35mm distort more than a tech camera 35mm??

A Schneider 35xl has *very* near to zero distortion, even when shifted.

So in absolute terms it has less distortion than a contax zeiss 35mm.

But I think the more relevant question is "will the level of distortion of the zeiss 35mm cause me significant issues?" Given the (relatively) low level of distortion (though "relative" is a dangerous term - relative to what?) and the availability of easy lens correction in capture one (assuming you're using a mamiya leaf or phase back) is very likely no.

Another relevant question is do I need rise/fall/shift/tilt/swing? Or further, will the sacrifices in some aspects of shooting (namely TTL composition and autofocus), be worth it to me for the gain of movements and great lens quality?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Doug Peterson on March 17, 2013, 07:24:58 pm
Although it would be great to have  5 or 6 or 8 lenses, realistically you will fall in love with one of them and shoot almost everything with that lens.  I remember once reading an essay by Jock Sturges where he said that for most shoots, he only brings one lens and one film type because it forces him to concentrate on the composition and light more.  Having too many lenses or film types only takes time away from composing the image because you now have to think about what lense should I use?

I think two lenses is more than enough to start with.  As long as you have a decently wide lens, no client is going to get annoyed.  None of my clients have a camera that even gets close enough to the width of a 35mm on a MF system, so they never complain that the shot is not wide enough.  Plus I hate going wide (or that wide) most of the time. 

I'd say somewhere around 1/3rd of our clients who are starting a system starting with owning 1 or 2 lenses. Part of the assumption is they will acquire more as budget allows and rent as needed until then.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 18, 2013, 05:14:02 am
In a previous comment someone mentioned small client budgets as a reason that they don't use supplementary lighting. I am trying to say that no budget is too small (at least anything that is even worth considering shooting for) that someone can't bring a few small flashes or inexpensive halogen lights for at least occasional use.

Thats true. If you have the time, you can add some supplemental lighting for very little money and inconvenience. I do it sometimes. But when the budget is low and time is very limited in a space or building and the client wants many shots then generally available light and a DSLR with shift lenses is king.

Regarding Camera / Lenses.

I would love to use medium format, mainly for the sometimes superior optics, color and dynamic range but I find that I use the 14-17mm focal length range quite a bit on interior spaces and I just don't know if there are some viable alternatives for those lenses in a MF Digital body or a technical camera with an MFDB. Phase One / Mamiya has the 28mm which on the largest MFDB sensors is about an 18mm equivalent on 35mm full frame and Hasselblad has the new 24mm which is about a 17mm equivalent. I have seen samples of the Phase / Mamiya 28 and its ok but not great and I have not found much info on the Hasselblad 24mm. But, the Canon 17 and the 24 have shift and are really good lenses. I love to use shift on a lot of the images I make to maximize the use of the sensor.

Now the D800e is also in the mix. not much because of its resolution but forits amazing low iso dynamic range which is a huge asset in architecture photography if you wish to deal with high contrast scenes with single image capture.

Also, there is the unique Hartblei HCAM. I do not have much info on this camera but looks like an amazing option.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MHFA on March 20, 2013, 04:38:41 pm
Winter isn`t the best time for architectural photographers in Europe so I tested automatic stitching hardware (Seitz Roundshot).
100MP, 200MP, 400MP up to 1000MP.
There is no end...doesn`t matter how much pictures you take the stitch is perfect.
My MFDB with the best german lenses seems to be a point and shoot camera if you compare it to a stitch of 80 Canon 5D (2005!!) pictures.
(using a 200€ 100mm lens....)

I think technical quality doesn`t matter anymore...



Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MHFA on March 20, 2013, 04:49:27 pm
Why should we use the best equipment if we have to shoot architecture like this...
Soory, Craig it is a picture from your Homepage, a very good picture, but the architecture .......
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 20, 2013, 04:54:07 pm
Why?  Because the person who designed that may have had perimeters that could not be over come.  Maybe it was not his choice to have the project end up like that.  Maybe he wants to eventually get to the point were he has the high end projects.  If we careless about shooting his lower beginning projects and show no enthusiasm, should we expect him to hire us when he does get a awesome project.  Don't think so.  

Not to say this was a bad project, just going along with the theme. 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on March 20, 2013, 05:16:06 pm
I agree Joe. I try to give every client and every project 110%. No one hires me to critique their design, but to make their project look its best. To do that I have to find something I can be enthusiastic about-not always easy to do-but I can always find some motivation in the clients intent. I decided long ago that life is too short to be an arrogant ahole, looking down your nose at your clients sincere efforts.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 20, 2013, 05:29:22 pm
Pulling someone's work off their website, posting it on a public forum and criticizing their client is not cool.  I mean, we all shoot work that we would never want anyone to see.  Hell, my clients will usually say "I'm sorry.  It's awful, I know.  We just need a couple shots because..."  We smile, we make the best photographs we can for them and we take their money.

But, honestly, please don't ever do that again.  Seriously not cool.

CB
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: julienlanoo on March 20, 2013, 05:56:28 pm
Chris Barret Agreed!,

To Craig:
Just to help out
I've seen there's a small error on your site, simpel to solve..
on line 85 of your source code of the main page you have:
   <a class="style16" href="index.htm">ARCHITECTURA</a>L&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
it should be:
   <a class="style16" href="index.htm">ARCHITECTURAL</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

that way the "L" of architecturaL is also a "link" :)
and you can delete all the : "&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp"
that's only clutter and Google-bot does not like it :)

greets 
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MHFA on March 20, 2013, 06:03:06 pm
I am really sorry, I will never do it again, please forgive me but keep on the discussion. I don`t want to be arrogant, but is it really correct to make wonderful pictures of horrible architectural projects?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 20, 2013, 06:09:27 pm
is it really correct to make wonderful pictures of horrible architectural projects?


LoL...  If I had a dollar for every time I've said this to my assistant.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MHFA on March 20, 2013, 06:19:01 pm
I hope Craig forgives me also...

Architects have a similar position, their clients often want to have a spectacular building, doesn`t matter the city around.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: rethmeier on March 20, 2013, 08:11:09 pm
90% of the stuff I shoot,doesn't get posted my website.

Potential clients only want to see the "good" stuff!
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: ACH DIGITAL on March 20, 2013, 09:07:36 pm
I fell relieved to hear all this. I thought it was only me having to photograph some ugly places..

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 20, 2013, 11:31:29 pm
I am really sorry, I will never do it again, please forgive me but keep on the discussion. I don`t want to be arrogant, but is it really correct to make wonderful pictures of horrible architectural projects?


I shoot for commerce.  A dollar is a dollar.  I don't judge, I just shoot.  Then I cash the checks.  The guy who had this structure built is quite proud of it, spent a lot of money on it and it reflects his visions and feelings. Not my job to decide if it is good or bad.  Only to try and take a decent photo.

I'm not really an architectural shooter, I shoot product, mostly RV and boat interiors and I'll never be a C. Barrett.  Sorry if my work is not up to snuff.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 20, 2013, 11:32:32 pm
Chris Barret Agreed!,

To Craig:
Just to help out
I've seen there's a small error on your site, simpel to solve..
on line 85 of your source code of the main page you have:
   <a class="style16" href="index.htm">ARCHITECTURA</a>L&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
it should be:
   <a class="style16" href="index.htm">ARCHITECTURAL</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

that way the "L" of architecturaL is also a "link" :)
and you can delete all the : "&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp"
that's only clutter and Google-bot does not like it :)

greets 

Thanks
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MHFA on March 21, 2013, 02:06:41 am
Dear Craig.
I took your picture because it is really good. It is much more difficult to take a good picture of a horrible project...
This topic started "architectural photography - best equipment".
I only wanted to state my opinion that this is not all in architectural photography.

I also shoot for commerce. I also have to take pictures of bad projects, but I can`t avoid to judge.
Sometimes I would like to see it so professional like Craig.

Michael
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 21, 2013, 07:56:35 am
I fell relieved to hear all this. I thought it was only me having to photograph some ugly places..



 I and a lot of Professional Photographers get paid because we can make a mediocre space or building look great. That applies to people also  ;D

If it were easy, anyone would do it... In fact clients will often try to do stuff themselves and when they can't, they call a pro.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Jeffreytotaro on March 21, 2013, 10:02:57 am
Some of my favorite shots from a creative point of view, are shots where we had to make something out of nothing. These really test your skills and are quite frankly harder shots to pull off. Stepping into some star-chitect's projects in my opinion is an easier day when great compositions fall in your lap due to the great design. These are obviously more fun to shoot, and can be easier to make a great photo. I respect the work my clients do, and if they want to shoot it I treat it like every other shot, even still working with the MFDB system. Might feel silly using that gear on an accessible bathroom shot, but that's what I work with for 99% of my work.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: torger on March 21, 2013, 11:01:08 am
something out of nothing

that ability is what makes up a great photographer I think.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Harold Clark on March 21, 2013, 12:24:11 pm
Is it really correct to make wonderful pictures of horrible architectural projects?

I have had my share as well of photographing products of the "Eyesore" school of design. I sometimes shoot for manufacturers of materials that are used in construction, and they require photos of the finished project. A marketing manager explained to me that they sometimes do this for political reasons. A major customer might be offended if some of their projects didn't appear in the calendar, marketing materials etc.

The worst offenders are subdivisions which consist of a garage with a house attached to the rear. Might as well eliminate the garage, they are filled with junk anyway and the cars are still parked out in the weather.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Scott Hargis on March 21, 2013, 03:07:49 pm

"Is it really correct to make wonderful pictures of horrible architectural projects?"


I get this all the time: "Oh, Scott, you get the best places to shoot." And I'm always thinking, "No, it was actually kind of crappy, and I made it look good."

A couple of other thoughts, regarding the lights/no lights discussion:

First, I have to say I agree with CB. If you don't know how, then you're not really making the decision, are you?
Second, in my opinion, "good" supplemental light accomplishes the goal of rendering the reality of the scene into a dynamic range that the camera can actually capture. Saying things like "I want my photos to look natural," are really red herrings, because "natural" is meaningless when you compare your eye/brain combination to your camera. The camera will NEVER see things the way you do.
Unfortunately, learning to light things well is hard, and so you do see an awful lot of flashy, flat images out there. Gives lighting a bad name.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Guy Mancuso on March 21, 2013, 06:24:38 pm
Lighting is also one of the keys of making nothing look like something. Personally maybe I'm old school but photography is all about light. It simply dont exist without it, knowing lighting and being good at it is one of the major keys to successfull imagery.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on March 21, 2013, 07:21:33 pm
IMO natural light is always superior to our lighting. Though it is fun to make something dull look soooo juicy. Maybe that attitude comes from my b&w landscape work where I only do natural light. I carry around a truckload of lighting for commercial jobs, gels, halogin and strobe, enough to light a seriously large building. But since I gave up film we use it allot less. Maybe half of our use of it with film was just to "clean up" mixed light sources to get it to match daylight or tunsten film. Digital is much more forgiving with mixed light (layering may be necessary oftentimes). So our lighting now is more about just accents and filling dark areas. Most of our clients these days, largely designers and magazines, want the lighting to be or at least mimic their lighting design. We find that making their lighting design work on the files is much easier than it was on film. In a very real way (for those who were around 20 years ago) we are approaching lighting minimally-much like European architectural photographers were doing during the film days.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: David Eichler on March 21, 2013, 07:38:02 pm
"IMO natural light is always superior to our lighting."

My feeling as well, for all sorts of subject matter. To me, supplementary lighting is primarily remedial or compensatory. That is, it is to help compensate for situations where the camera does not see the way the eye does, when there is not sufficient time to wait for the ideal ambient lighting, or when the ambient lighting is never really that great.  For commercial work, I feel that you are really limiting your options if you don't have the capability to use at least some supplementary lighting.

As to the comments about the quality of the subject matter for architectural photography, well...tastes vary. Some people don't like Modern design at all. Some people don't like nouveau-vieux mediterranean.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Kirk Gittings on March 21, 2013, 08:50:10 pm
Joe? I have actually no idea what you are responding to or what point you are making. I even read back a few pages.....
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Chris Barrett on March 21, 2013, 10:43:43 pm
I think you guys are oversimplifying what lighting can be.  When I light a scene, we're not just filling the dark areas so that the camera sees like the eye.  We add character to bring out the richness of materials and depth of dimension that never exists under the ambient lighting.  We're backlighting glass to make it glow, reflecting light into stainless and metallic finishes to make them sparkle, raking light across textured materials to make them feel more tactile, pulling out the color and grain of wood that would normally sit there lifelessly.

No amount of dynamic range will ever yield results similar to what can be done with fastidious and sensitive lighting.  For 20 years my clients have been telling me that my photographs look better than the actual architecture.  To me that means I did my job.  I'm not a journalist.  I'm not there to document the compromises that we're made during construction.  I'm there to make my client's work look vastly superior to their competitors.  Welcome to commercial photography.

/rant off
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: TMARK on March 21, 2013, 10:52:12 pm
I think you guys are oversimplifying what lighting can be.  When I light a scene, we're not just filling the dark areas so that the camera sees like the eye.  We add character to bring out the richness of materials and depth of dimension that never exists under the ambient lighting.  We're backlighting glass to make it glow, reflecting light into stainless and metallic finishes to make them sparkle, raking light across textured materials to make them feel more tactile, pulling out the color and grain of wood that would normally sit there lifelessly.

No amount of dynamic range will ever yield results similar to what can be done with fastidious and sensitive lighting.  For 20 years my clients have been telling me that my photographs look better than the actual architecture.  To me that means I did my job.  I'm not a journalist.  I'm not there to document the compromises that we're made during construction.  I'm there to make my client's work look vastly superior to their competitors.  Welcome to commercial photography.

/rant off

This is great Chris.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 21, 2013, 10:57:13 pm
I'm there to make my client's work look vastly superior to their competitors.  Welcome to commercial photography.

/rant off

Amen....Sometimes available light looks pretty bad and the product is in a dirty old factory...

...and then you need to style and light it.  With the goal being to fit the mood required by the AD and making the clients work look vastly superior to the competition...



Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 22, 2013, 12:43:01 am
Amen....Sometimes available light looks pretty bad and the product is in a dirty old factory...

...and then you need to style and light it.  With the goal being to fit the mood required by the AD and making the clients work look vastly superior to the competition...





Was the art director happy with the fake woods. Doesn't look real at all.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: David Eichler on March 22, 2013, 02:50:40 am
I think you guys are oversimplifying what lighting can be.  When I light a scene, we're not just filling the dark areas so that the camera sees like the eye.  We add character to bring out the richness of materials and depth of dimension that never exists under the ambient lighting.  We're backlighting glass to make it glow, reflecting light into stainless and metallic finishes to make them sparkle, raking light across textured materials to make them feel more tactile, pulling out the color and grain of wood that would normally sit there lifelessly.

No amount of dynamic range will ever yield results similar to what can be done with fastidious and sensitive lighting.  For 20 years my clients have been telling me that my photographs look better than the actual architecture.  To me that means I did my job.  I'm not a journalist.  I'm not there to document the compromises that we're made during construction.  I'm there to make my client's work look vastly superior to their competitors.  Welcome to commercial photography.

/rant off


I was not only referring to dynamic range, but the quality of the ambient lighting, and I did not mean to imply that lighting such as you describe could not be highly creative and effective. I think your comment illustrates the point very well that the ambient lighting in a large majority of interiors is far from ideal if one is seeking very compelling results. And, if that is the case for the kind of stuff you typically seem to shoot, then that it is even more the case for more routine subject matter, or for more traditional architectural styles that make less use of high quality ambient lighting. However, as in the example I cited above, there are some architectural photographers working at a very high level who seem to be able to get by without any lighting and use extensive Photoshop retouching; but I suspect that they have to be more selective about what subject matter they choose to photograph. And, in the case of Scott Frances at least, subtractive lighting is another option, though it does not necessarily require expensive equipment.

All I am saying is that, when I can get it, my preference is for great ambient lighting when I can get it, not because it is easier, but because I like the way it looks and it because it is not possible to duplicate with any amount of supplementary lighting. Also, great ambient lighting, while it might make shooting and processing easier, can still require a lot of planning and waiting around, so it isn't necessarily easier.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 22, 2013, 03:24:50 am
Yesterday I got an interesting phone call from a big building company I work for before. The contracted me for an new book-project. He explained to me that (having my pictures from last year in mind as well as my images on my website) they now rather want images that are not so perfect/optimised. no perfect blue sky (something that is out of favour in germany since a while). No retouching of the surrounding grounds... . He said, they don´t want Images that look so perfect - he sometimes doesn´t know if he looking at a rendering or a real picture. they want picture more in this style (pictures quickly picked from my website):
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: yaya on March 22, 2013, 04:01:57 am
Some nice work on your site Stefan!

BTW I'll be in Frankfurt next month (12/4) for the PCP event...maybe you can come by to say hello?

BR, yair

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 22, 2013, 04:25:49 am
Yesterday I got an interesting phone call from a big building company I work for before. The contracted me for an new book-project. He explained to me that (having my pictures from last year in mind as well as my images on my website) they now rather want images that are not so perfect/optimised. no perfect blue sky (something that is out of favour in germany since a while). No retouching of the surrounding grounds... . He said, they don´t want Images that look so perfect - he sometimes doesn´t know if he looking at a rendering or a real picture. they want picture more in this style:


That is a very interesting point. So much work is so over processed and retouched that it totally loses that special touch of photography.
More and more smart clients are realizing this. it's happening more in Europe and the US is a little slower to follow, but this is the land of cosmetic plastic surgery.
personally I dislike so much of that fake looking skin in portraits and fashion. "Working files deep" and ending up with fake people and skin tones that would have a doctor worried.
Imperfection is character and there is no substantial beauty without character.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 22, 2013, 04:42:35 am
Some nice work on your site Stefan!
BR, yair

thanks yair - you will be please to hear that the 2 of the 3 photos posted where shoot with my mamiya. for some reason, when clients request (raw looking images with an edge) I often pic the mamiya over the 5d2. the canon images look by default optimised.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MrSmith on March 22, 2013, 06:03:11 am
Not wishing to be churlish but what's with the HDR Flickr look in the Dresden pic? It's not straight either is that intentional? Or is that the kind of 'natural' the client is after.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 22, 2013, 06:38:24 am
actually I have never ever used HDR in my life since I don´t like it.
this picture has nearly no postprocessing done to it. I never use anything further than LR - just darken the sky a bit when it´s to bright - or here for effect. I was taking pictures in near sunny weather when suddenly the sky turned like this! (I must admit, I have never seen dark clouds like this before or after).


Not wishing to be churlish but what's with the HDR Flickr look in the Dresden pic? It's not straight either is that intentional? Or is that the kind of 'natural' the client is after.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: JoeKitchen on March 22, 2013, 08:12:57 am
There are two things I find interesting about this whole conversation.  First, if we shot food, or fashion, or product, the idea of not using good light would be laughable and the images produced without it would not be up to par.  But being we are architectural photographers, we are allowed to use bad light?  I just don't get this philosophy.  

Secondly, if you do not want to create additional space by using light, or add texture to materials, or make shinny surfaces come to life, that's great.  But do you want to render color correctly?  I posted an image last night but took it down because I did not feel like explaining it at the time; I posted it again below.  This graph shows the amount of visible light present in common light sources.  Notice how tungsten and sunlight (and strobes which are not on there but mirror sunlight closely) have all of the visible spectrum.  Yes, some colors are stronger than others, but with filters or software we can remove the excess and render color correct.  Now look at mercury vapor, the most common fluorescent lighting by far.  It must be missing at least 60% of the spectrum; this will greatly effect you ability to render color correct.  This, I feel, just can not be ignored, and to tell students of photography that lighting is not needed without explaining this is doing them a great disservice.  
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 22, 2013, 08:25:26 am
Was the art director happy with the fake woods. Doesn't look real at all.

Ah or course Fred checks in.

Everyone was very pleased.  Nothing "fake" here at all.  Well except for the plastic wood trim over the slideouts, and the laminate on the cabinet sides, and the veneer used elsewhere.  Its an RV Fred.

But by all means Fred please tell us how to do it better. I shoot a hundred of these things a year, your input on how to imporove would be valuable.  Even better how about a link to your work?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: kers on March 22, 2013, 08:30:51 am
actually I have never ever used HDR in my life since I don´t like it.
this picture has nearly no postprocessing done to it. I never use anything further than LR - just darken the sky a bit when it´s to bright - or here for effect. I was taking pictures in near sunny weather when suddenly the sky turned like this! (I must admit, I have never seen dark clouds like this before or after).

So itis  interesting to see;  it is not about if it is real or not, but if it looks real...
I agree it lookes like HDR - and even if it is real i do not like it...because of that...
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: stefan marquardt on March 22, 2013, 02:44:12 pm
i do not like it...because of that...

kers, I honestly hope you are not offended if I couldn´t care less.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 22, 2013, 03:14:09 pm
Ah or course Fred checks in.

Everyone was very pleased.  Nothing "fake" here at all.  Well except for the plastic wood trim over the slideouts, and the laminate on the cabinet sides, and the veneer used elsewhere.  Its an RV Fred.

But by all means Fred please tell us how to do it better. I shoot a hundred of these things a year, your input on how to imporove would be valuable.  Even better how about a link to your work?

I'm talking about the compositing of the trees outside the windows. That's what I'm saying doesn't look very real.
You did a very nice job of making the internal space look larger and spacious. The additional lighting is just "casual enough" to not look rendered
resulting in a quite realistic look.

Regarding the windows and the internal lighting. You have a look of sunlight coming into the RV casting shadows on the floor,
cold highlights on the leather sofas and you have the woods and field outside light by warm sunset light.

Also the windows look like cut out holes more than glass. I nice trick to give the windows more of a real feel is to take a shot with dark black
outside the windows and using a screen mode composite to bring a bit of reflection and slight presence of glass back.

I think that a brighter outside scene outside would have blended netter with the interior lighting.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 22, 2013, 05:53:29 pm
I'm talking about the compositing of the trees outside the windows. That's what I'm saying doesn't look very real.
You did a very nice job of making the internal space look larger and spacious. The additional lighting is just "casual enough" to not look rendered
resulting in a quite realistic look.

Regarding the windows and the internal lighting. You have a look of sunlight coming into the RV casting shadows on the floor,
cold highlights on the leather sofas and you have the woods and field outside light by warm sunset light.

Also the windows look like cut out holes more than glass. I nice trick to give the windows more of a real feel is to take a shot with dark black
outside the windows and using a screen mode composite to bring a bit of reflection and slight presence of glass back.

I think that a brighter outside scene outside would have blended netter with the interior lighting.

Fair enough.  However the windows are dark tint, nearly back.  The outdoor scene was reduced in both intensity and saturation to reflect this tint.  And I agree some reflections would be nice and it gets done sometimes if time permits.


The glass reflection this IS kind of interesting given the discussion of a natural reflection in  CB photo ....
BTW, how about that link to your work?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: kers on March 22, 2013, 07:31:32 pm
kers, I honestly hope you are not offended if I couldn´t care less.

No it was not meant personal at all - just about how we see things..

Sometimes reality seems more unreal than fiction...

a lot of documentaries show this as well as your sky...

In the same way I think FredBGG is right about the trees as is Graig Lamson saying it is real....but does not look too real...


Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: FredBGG on March 22, 2013, 08:33:18 pm
Fair enough.  However the windows are dark tint, nearly back.  The outdoor scene was reduced in both intensity and saturation to reflect this tint.  And I agree some reflections would be nice and it gets done sometimes if time permits.


The glass reflection this IS kind of interesting given the discussion of a natural reflection in  CB photo ....
BTW, how about that link to your work?

Being dark windows in reality there would be some reflection and it takes just a little to add that natural look.
You can see some reflection in the shot that still has the factory behind the windows.
IF you don't have time at the shoot you can also fake something by using a mirror image of something in the camper.
Just blend in only some highlights.

Regarding my work it's quite different. Not interior design, however I have shot actors portraits on sets with fake windows and need to to composite
in some background. I also do visual effects for motion picture. I was VFX supervisor on a feature where we had to turn a stage performance from flood light to dark
and moody. The lighting system went wrong when they shot the scene. Months of work. Anyway we added follow spots and it was
all looking really quite good, but something was wrong. After putting it away for a few days and looking at it fresh it hit me.
There were not lens abberations on the spot projector and no dust in the path of the spot. There also were not any reflection on the dark stage floor as the fake spot
went by. After adding the reflections and a bit of crap in the air the spot passed through the director and the star of the movie loved the shot. It was the crucial closing shot of the movie
in Constitution Hall in Washington.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 23, 2013, 09:51:37 am
No problem Ashley, and as a rule I prefer a more open, airy feel to my images, however the client wanted darker and "moody"  (whatever that means...I simply hate this 'direction')  And since I agree that I want to produce an image the client will want to use, I gave them what they asked for...kind of.

Quite frankly they would have liked it to be even darker.

And that's the rub. In this instance the initial client, the Ad agency had a vision  of deep and dark, very little fill, lots of almost black holes.  All well and good, and I've been working with this team for years.  On other side the sales people and the dealer base need images to sell from.  Quite often they won't have a floor plan or decor package for a perpendicular unit in stock so they sell from photos. These guys want to see every color, very detail, every fiber is possible.  They hate shadows.  Typically I'll hear that the shadow from the sofa on the floor is obscuring the carpet, even though there is fully illuminated carpet right next to the shadowed carpet.  So I'm stuck between two schools of thought and need.  And I'm not going to be able to produce two images to satisfy both.  So in this case I added just enough light to open up the shadows so they were not black holes.

Creative choices dictated by the clients needs.  As you often say there is over 100 ways to shoot any image.  

Sales guys and dealers love images that look like this..AD's not so much as a rule.  Finding a middle ground can be very tricky indeed.

Now to try and tie this back into the original topic.  Back when I still had a huge studio and they delivered the units to me for photography I used boatloads of tungsten to light these things.  I loved Moles and Peppers.  A couple of 2k's for sunlight, supported by 2k zips for open fill from the windows.  Lots of Peppers inside to accent, and a 420 or 1k ceiling bounce for fill.  A quick way to use up 200 amps of power...

Lighting was not an option, it was a need.  Tungsten..fresnels gave great control and the ability to detail light.  I love it but we could spend a full day on a single interior shot.

Then the RV business crashed hard.  Companies when out of business overnight.  I had to give up my 10,000 sq foot studio.  Rates plummeted.  So it was adjust or die, or find another niche. 

Now its all done on location at the factory.  They won't deliver units if they don't need to. You must work in a bay at the end of the assembly line.  You can't control the ambient.  You only have at most 2-3 20 amp circuits to draw power.  Often times its one and the power to the trailer.  So now its strobe and quite frankly I've never been a fan.  So I tend to shoot in segments and layer in post.  I just don't have the control of Tungsten nor the power to use it.  The upside is the clean color of strobe,

What are you using and why?

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 23, 2013, 10:22:20 am
Ah or course Fred checks in.

Everyone was very pleased.  Nothing "fake" here at all.  Well except for the plastic wood trim over the slideouts, and the laminate on the cabinet sides, and the veneer used elsewhere.  Its an RV Fred.

But by all means Fred please tell us how to do it better. I shoot a hundred of these things a year, your input on how to imporove would be valuable.  Even better how about a link to your work?

Hi, looking at the images its obvious to me that its a VERY tough subject to shoot.

On your lighted image there are some very nasty shadows and the color temp of the flashes is a little too separated (in temperature) from the available lights. I would have gelled the flashes with about 1/4 CTO (maybe 1/2?), increased the ambient light exposure up a little bit so it mixes for with the flash (and filled in the shadows a bit) and turned on the fan so that the harsh shadow on the ceiling is smoothed a little bit.

Then in post try to adjust color and highlights/shadows to taste (which you obviously did to please your client) and maybe do a bit of dodging and burning here and there.

Regarding the styling I would have probably removed the basket near the window on the left, the bag in front of the coffee pot. Also, dunno about the carrots and the cloth on the foreground, look a little to unrealistic to me the way they are placed, maybe I wouldve used a cutting board as prop, dunno.

Composition wise its good (not much options there!) I might have tried to include the entire table in the foreground (maybe wider lens? or position the camera lower?) but dunno for sure.

Anyway, what matters is that the client is happy and just move on to the next job  :)

But thanks for posting, it shows how to make something out of nothing.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MrSmith on March 23, 2013, 10:23:04 am
unless you were there listening to the art director and watching the face they pull when you suggest something any critique is moot.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 23, 2013, 10:52:49 am
Hi, looking at the images its obvious to me that its a VERY tough subject to shoot.

On your lighted image there are some very nasty shadows and the color temp of the flashes is a little too separated (in temperature) from the available lights. I would have gelled the flashes with about 1/4 CTO (maybe 1/2?), increased the ambient light exposure up a little bit so it mixes for with the flash (and filled in the shadows a bit) and turned on the fan so that the harsh shadow on the ceiling is smoothed a little bit.

Then in post try to adjust color and highlights/shadows to taste (which you obviously did to please your client) and maybe do a bit of dodging and burning here and there.

Regarding the styling I would have probably removed the basket near the window on the left, the bag in front of the coffee pot. Also, dunno about the carrots and the cloth on the foreground, look a little to unrealistic to me the way they are placed, maybe I wouldve used a cutting board as prop, dunno.

Composition wise its good (not much options there!) I might have tried to include the entire table in the foreground (maybe wider lens? or position the camera lower?) but dunno for sure.

Anyway, what matters is that the client is happy and just move on to the next job  :)

But thanks for posting, it shows how to make something out of nothing.

Interesting thoughts, thanks.  But dude, that was shot with a 12mm on a full frame 35mm...and the camera was flush with the back wall.

Styling is so personal but to be frank, we (my wife and I) shoot about 100 of these trailers a year.  And then they throw the images away and we shoot the same updated trailers again..and again...and again.  We have a pile of props and we buy constantly, but it gets very hard to keep the styling fresh. And generally we have a single day to shoot, often 10 or 15 images.  Gone are the days we would send an entire day on a major interior.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 23, 2013, 10:55:15 am
To me, that would mean either a night time look or a late evening look - rather than the look one would except to see on a sunny day.

Example of dark & moody...
(http://www.ashleymorrison.com/2013-03/Shearwater-03.jpg)
.. as opposed to bright & airy...
(http://www.ashleymorrison.com/2013-03/Shearwater-04.jpg)
.. of the same room.




What were you selling, the ambience or the fabrics, finishes and layout?
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 23, 2013, 11:12:32 am
Interesting thoughts, thanks.  But dude, that was shot with a 12mm on a full frame 35mm...and the camera was flush with the back wall.

Styling is so personal but to be frank, we (my wife and I) shoot about 100 of these trailers a year.  And then they throw the images away and we shoot the same updated trailers again..and again...and again.  We have a pile of props and we buy constantly, but it gets very hard to keep the styling fresh. And generally we have a single day to shoot, often 10 or 15 images.  Gone are the days we would send an entire day on a major interior.

Oh my, thats a LOT of trailers!  :o  (good for business though :) )

I know the feeling of being against the wall with the widest lens available (mine is a 14mm L II) when shooting interiors. I used to have the Sigma 12-24 but the 14 L II was so much better I sold the Sigma and make do with 14mm although I might buy another one just for situations like the one you posted. That is one aspect where Medium Format lacks, well, there is now the HCAM-B1. Put a 14mm or 17 TSE on that and its probably the widest rectilinear image one can make. Would love to try it.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 23, 2013, 11:27:52 am
Oh my, thats a LOT of trailers!  :o  (good for business though :) )

I know the feeling of being against the wall with the widest lens available (mine is a 14mm L II) when shooting interiors. I used to have the Sigma 12-24 but the 14 L II was so much better I sold the Sigma and make do with 14mm although I might buy another one just for situations like the one you posted. That is one aspect where Medium Format lacks, well, there is now the HCAM-B1. Put a 14mm or 17 TSE on that and its probably the widest rectilinear image one can make. Would love to try it.

Lack of a really wide lens is what has kept me out of MFD.  Used to use the 65 and 75  when we shot 4x5 film.  The Sigma is far from perfect, but it works so well for my needs.  And quite frankly none of my clients would notice the difference if I could shoot MFD.  Most of this stuff never goes beyond 11x17 on press.

For perspective, this is the floor plan for the original photos I posted. 39 feet long and 8 feet wide without the slide outs.

BTW, I do appreciate the the comments and suggestions from everyone, thanks.

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Craig Lamson on March 23, 2013, 11:35:46 am
I just sell the Rights to use my images  ;)

The client here, a hotel, was wanting me to provide them with some images to help them sell their various rooms - this being one of them.
So we shot it both ways, as they liked the idea of a dark & mood image - to appeal to the weekend market (couples / females).
However, for the business market (business people staying during the week), they liked the idea of a more bright & airy image.

So it was more about selling the look in this case - as the fabrics, finishes and layout didn't change - which is why I posted them.  



 

I know why you posted them, but my point, which I think you know as well, was that different client needs require different approaches to fulfill a similar client demand, like "dark and moody".

Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Doug Peterson on March 23, 2013, 12:01:36 pm
Lack of a really wide lens is what has kept me out of MFD.  Used to use the 65 and 75  when we shot 4x5 film.  The Sigma is far from perfect, but it works so well for my needs.  And quite frankly none of my clients would notice the difference if I could shoot MFD.  Most of this stuff never goes beyond 11x17 on press.

I don't understand, an IQ260, HCam or Alpa FPS, and a 17mm TS or the new Canon Fisheye are great ultra-wide options in medium format.

Or a Rodenstock 23HR. The equivalent to a 13mm or 15mm FF dSLR lens (depending on if using vertical, horizontal, or diagonal for comparison).

Resolution (size of print) is only one image quality advantage of medium format. It's easy to focus on because there is an easy-to-reference number. But the visual rendering (color, tonality, file-malleability, dimensionality, microcontrast) are all different.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: MrSmith on March 23, 2013, 12:29:02 pm
I don't understand,

happy client, easily acquired depth of field(cramped working conditions and lots of depth of field for the whole trailer to be in focus) and a not insignificant amount of £$€ saved. makes perfect sense to me.
Title: Re: Architectural / interior photography - best equipment?
Post by: Ken R on March 23, 2013, 01:21:38 pm
happy client, easily acquired depth of field(cramped working conditions and lots of depth of field for the whole trailer to be in focus) and a not insignificant amount of £$€ saved. makes perfect sense to me.

Exactly, it's all about the service.

This image I am posting is for a aluminum and glass window manufacturer. Its part of layout (which I dont have right now) that includes some text and lines (hence some space had to be left for it) and its before it was retouched and cropped. This was just my output from lightroom. I had to use about 4 profoto heads IIRC. At least one was outside off-frame with the magnum reflector. This is a combination Architecture / People  shot that usually HAS to be lit. I have done the same with ARRi tungsten lights but this time I needed a lot more power being it was full daylight (client request). I wanted it to be more of an evening shot, oh well. (I used a "lowly" Canon 5D3 and the 24mm TSE II)