alessandro.eu Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Hi, Is there anyone offering both services? Photography+Visualizations? I'd like to start my path on Architectural Photography as service for clients but I already make visualizations. I'm wondering if it is wise to mix the two services as this could be seen not very professional but on the other end the target is the same. any experience on that? thank you Alessandro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil poppleton Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Seems the perfect combination to me. If its built take a photograph if its not built visualise it. I have heard of another such person doing exactly this but cannot remember the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryannelson Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Hi, Is there anyone offering both services? Photography+Visualizations? I'd like to start my path on Architectural Photography as service for clients but I already make visualizations. I'm wondering if it is wise to mix the two services as this could be seen not very professional but on the other end the target is the same. any experience on that? thank you Alessandro I think all visualizers should be photographers but not all photographers should be visualizers. The best visualizations are often strong because of excellent photographic quality - not to be confused with photographic realism. Framing, lighting, depth of field, ambiance etc... all photography skills. I do both and I think my renders are stronger because of experience in shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandro.eu Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 I think all visualizers should be photographers but not all photographers should be visualizers. The best visualizations are often strong because of excellent photographic quality - not to be confused with photographic realism. Framing, lighting, depth of field, ambiance etc... all photography skills. I do both and I think my renders are stronger because of experience in shooting. That's absolutely true. Would be interesting hearing from someone doing both professionaly. I'm pretty sure that big agencies offer either visuals and photos but never found a freelance (like me) doing both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexisbasso2 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I also think this could be a good business. Joining what Neil Poppleton said: if it is a project just visualize it, if it is built just shoot it. It is a complete High-end marketing service you offer here to sell projects, attracts investors, magazines pictures, advertisement etc... But has anyone performed some kind of study see if there's a market, if this kind of project has a chance to be successful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Penaloza Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I would say I do both professionally, if you call a professional who's gets paid to do their craft. I consider my self a solid visualization artist, but I do not consider my self a professional Architectural Photographer. (A craft that I respect truly) I think just do a general assumption such, because you do visualization you should be good photographing the same stuff in real life it is not right. Let me tell you, there is a big difference. Yes there is some basic principles that apply such camera values, composition, lighting and stuff, but being in the field dealing with everything that you don't have in a CG world it make a great difference. I have worked with some pro photographers, and there is a lot of "tricks" they have learned with experience how to overcome with the difficulties that you get when you are in an uncontrollable environment. Within a studio it is "easier" because you can control almost everything, but an Architectural photographer has to deal with a lot. My point at the end is, yes it can be done. yes having experience in GC Photography will help you, but this does not mean it will make you instant Pro. Maybe there are not that many people promoting both business because both of them are hard to do, and if you want to be great a both, you need to dedicate a lot of time to it. Talking with photographer, they spend several hours, talking with customers, looking for new project, then retouching photography and such. in the other side a freelancer Arch Viz has to deal with the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesper Pedersen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Hi Allessandro, As Francisci said above, we also do both and likewise consider ourselves good at our work, but I would also stop short of calling ourselves professional Architectural photographers. Although we use decent equipment (the camera bag contains a €3000 camera and about the same in lenses), the jump to tryly professional photography would require an investment in hardware of about €20,000 - 30,000 (I am slightly guessing here) and I think we'd just about be able to master the hardware. However, in my opinion, professional photography differs from what we do. Again, I don't want to sell our work short as we genuinely make an effort to plan the photography, time of day, composition etc, but we are operating within budgets for our typical work where, unlike a professional photographer, we cannot always wait all evening to get 1 photo or for example visit a site 5 times untill we are happy with the light. An Architectural photographer should have Artistic ability, some serious equipment and a real dedication to the craft -this last one I think takes time. I think you should definitely combine photography as part of your visualisation work, but you may find it difficult to command the rates for your photography which a professional photographer must charge to deliver real professional level work. Good luck, in my opinion, the photography, while time-consuming is the most rewarding part of our work as a 3d visualisation service. regards Jesper pedersen Pedersen Focus Ltd http://www.pedersenfocus.ie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandro.eu Posted August 24, 2015 Author Share Posted August 24, 2015 Thank you Alexis/Francisco/Jesper for your replies, First of all I'd like to explain that I'm aware of the differences between CGI and photography, actually my background is more towards photography than visualisation but in these years I only worked professionaly on CGI and never thought to offer such service to clients. What I miss for sure is how to handle a task from start to finish in architectural photography as it requires a different schedule, contract, copyright agreements and technicalities that are different from what I usally do for visuals. Saying that, I don't know if marketing wise it works or not. As told on previous posts could be a nice service for clients...they have to ask just to one person/studio for all the imagery they need for built/unbilt projects. My worry is that clients could also be a bit confused on what you are offering and maybe they think that is better to hire one professional for visuals and another for photography. At the end is your work that speeks for you so a client should be able to understand if you can manage both but maybe the trend is to ask it to someone who does only one. As regards gear I think that nowadays cameras are really good and with an investment on two TS lenses you should be able to offer good images, technically speaking. @Jesper I saw your website and I don't see a section related to architectural photography, do you offer this service occasionally when required or do you market it separately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesper Pedersen Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 (edited) Hi Allessandro, No we don't claim to be professional photographers, but as you said, cameras are getting better and better and I'd like to think we achieve a good standard. We have come across some fantastic professional photographers but also one or two with very good equipment, who knew virtually nothing about photography for 3d visualisation (ie photographing an empty site) or in one case as basic as not using the highest setting on his camera's resolution ! . Anyway, if you think your work is up to it you should charge accordingly, but I think it would be very hard to have 2 standards within you work and only give the best standard to those who are hiring you as a professional photographer and then only do an average job for the rest (apologies if I'm misunderstanding you here). My advice would be stive for the best you can produce every time and hopefully you'll develop a reputation for really high-end work, then in time you'll get a client base who appreciate it the quality of your work and are willing to pay for it. regards Jesper pedersen Pedersen Focus Ltd www.pedersenfocus.ie Edited August 24, 2015 by jesper54321 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasallen Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Of course - its a great idea. There is so much retouching in architectural photography (and commercial photography in general) that it is practically the same thing minus one small step. I find that both mediums strengthen one another as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandro.eu Posted August 24, 2015 Author Share Posted August 24, 2015 Hi Allessandro, My advice would be stive for the best you can produce every time and hopefully you'll develop a reputation for really high-end work, then in time you'll get a client base who apprecfiate it the quality of your work and are willing to pay for it. Yes the idea is to offer the best I can on both services, I think I can produce good images both visuals and photography...my only doubt is the maket...but I will not know untill I'try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandro.eu Posted August 24, 2015 Author Share Posted August 24, 2015 Of course - its a great idea. There is so much retouching in architectural photography (and commercial photography in general) that it is practically the same thing minus one small step. I find that both mediums strengthen one another as well. Yes, what amazes me is how the average architectural photography nowadays is more towards renderings and high quality renderings are more towards photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasallen Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Same goal - a perfect image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
padre.ayuso Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Hi Alessandro, I'd be interested to know how this goes for you. I'm really interested in architectural photography myself and have worked in Arch Viz for 8 years now. As far as the same goal is concerned... a perfect image from the client's viewpoint, I guess, since I have made some awesome renderings, photorealistic where the client wanted an unrealistic effect. Likewise, taking photos with HDR in mind and then making the environment outside the window the same exposure as the inside the room. Funny enough, on my renderings I do completely the opposite as it would be "unreal" to do otherwise, so I blow out the outside in daylight as otherwise it would look "unrealistic". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alessandro.eu Posted August 26, 2015 Author Share Posted August 26, 2015 Hi Alessandro, I'd be interested to know how this goes for you. I'm really interested in architectural photography myself and have worked in Arch Viz for 8 years now. As far as the same goal is concerned... a perfect image from the client's viewpoint, I guess, since I have made some awesome renderings, photorealistic where the client wanted an unrealistic effect. Likewise, taking photos with HDR in mind and then making the environment outside the window the same exposure as the inside the room. Funny enough, on my renderings I do completely the opposite as it would be "unreal" to do otherwise, so I blow out the outside in daylight as otherwise it would look "unrealistic". Hi Alex, Yes what you said is exactly what I meant replying to Thomas especially on interiors. For now I'm working on my portfolio for Architectural Photography, luckily I'm an architect myself so I can shoot some of the interiors I did in the past. For those of you interested on my work you can follow updates on my FB page: https://www.facebook.com/aleguida Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now