I too, used to shoot a lot of real estate - high end real estate. My thoughts on the images are that they look way too fake - the colors don't pop (no contrast), the grass and sky are the wrong color (looks like a colored pencil drawing), the HDR effect gives a hazy white "diffused" look to the images, and there's too much vertical distortion from the WA lens (walls should be parallel). They are definitely flat and need more dynamic range.
I appreciate your critiques. And they help push me to do better with my RE photos and quick jobs. The client said he "loved the photos" and that is why they stayed the way they are. I let him know I was going to try a different look that I had seen and let him know that I could easily change the color back to a more natural state very quickly and free of charge. He did not wish to change them at all. Although, your critiques do/will help improve my work.
The compositions are good, but for the darkened areas, you should add/turn on some light (last shot - the shower should be popping with light so that it looks inviting). The kitchen shot has 3 color temperatures - that' makes the shot look unnatural and "dirty".
All the light were on and this was such a quick in and out job, I had no time to worry about extra lighting and the client did not want me to bring anything extra to the job that might slow anything down. Otherwise I would have changed all the bulb from tungsten to something closer to daylight to match the incoming light. Also, the lights under the cabinets were terrible florescent lights the he wanted on and yellow rather than off on dark. I also would have brought my 580 and 430exIIs to fill light if of course the budget would have approved for the extra time.
It's best to avoid using any HDR when doing RE imaging. It's like the truth in advertising stuff, should look natural. Now, if you add some light, that's better. It's the highlight to shadow range that is far apart, making you want to use HDR. But, if you light it right, you'll get much more contrasty, natural images. You can use a ND grad for the sky on outdoor stuff, fill strobes to brighten up shadows (under carports, etc). Indoors, turn on every light AND put bulbs in that are the right color temperature AND matching! I carry a Pelican that has nothing but 50 or so bulbs that are all the same temp.
None of these shots were processed to be HDR or were processed in HDR software. They just all single raw shots edited in LR to maximize the dynamic range, while still not being true HDR processed photos. I posted a couple images of re-edits, and would be curious to see if they seem more appealing to you. I did them really quick, but tried to keep them more natural looking while still trying to maximize the dynamic range available to me in the raw file. And again, I would never do all the extra lighting for a quick $75 job. These are not meant to be the best RE photos ever. I just wanted to see what the reaction would be to something that took me a total of 1 hour to shoot and edit. These are only meant to be critiques as "quickies", not are certainly not meant to be the "best" RE photos.
And, I would have definitely cleaned up the ground - myself or have my client do it first.
Yes, I agree. I would have liked that as well.
Even though it's a low pay job, there's still a standard you should establish. You don't want to explain to anybody and everybody who see's the shots that it was a cheap job - you want them to know what level of work you do (and assume that it was high paying!). I shoot for quite a few brokers and firms - if they were being cheap, I'd walk away gladly. I don't want to be known for being a cheap shooter, but rather a "perfectionist" and let my work negotiate the pay!
I do try and keep a certain standard, and I know these aren't the worst RE photos out there, I know they are not the best , but certainly not of the lowest standard. I simply did not have the time, or experience, to be able to shoot and edit this in 1 hour and produce amazing photos. Honestly, RE photos are only something I do on the side for two different agents and if they come to me with a $75-200 job and I have nothing else going on, then I am happy to do the work, and happy to do it quick and dirty if that is what they need. If I really got into RE photography then would take it much further and buy the Canon 17mm TS-E and maybe the 24TS-E and make sure I had all the proper lighting necessary for every job. Then it would no longer be a side job for me. I real work is in wedding videography. And that is something I have done ALOT of and have based all my gear purchasing decisions around. I also do wedding photography, but video is more my bread and butter and is where I believe I shine. RE photos are just a side thing for me and keep my mind fresh and learning by posting the images here. I am only 20 and have only been shooting photography for 1.5 years and video for 3. But I really do appreciate your critiques. I think a little bit of it just came off a little strong.