Re: Real Estate photography

On Mar 24, 7:36 pm, "Hek" <1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Just wondering how profitable real estate photography is these day? Have
> agents started doing some of their own digital stuff? I guess lower that
> could be for lower end properties. And what about floor plans? Do they
> expect the photographer to do that as well?
>
> Cheers

In Queensland, High level (overhead) and panorama room photos are much
in demand and highly paid... So I'm told!

You need a telescoping hoist on the side of a van to get the high
level stuff. You can step around shooting for panoramas of rooms.

The hoist will set you back $5k but it comes back in spades - (so I'm
told) by a videographer who also does real estate stills. He seems to
be doing well enough with a $15k video camera and $10k x3 still
cameras, a new van and of course the hoist plus God only knows how
much worth of edit suite.

Well... Maybe he's not doing so well. He was moonlighting as a wedding
videographer with a broadcast quality Sony when I came across him.
When I think about it, why would you use $20k worth of pro video gear
to shoot a $300 wedding video if you were doing well at your day job?
Maybe just to fill in the void, stop the boredom!

I get $65 a shot from Ray White RE when there's a fence or other
obstruction stopping their agent with a digicam from getting the shot.
Lean pickings mate... Real lean. In 1972 I worked for a firm in
Melbourne that did RE work. Their claim to fame was the overlay blurb
they used on the enlargements.

It was pretty lean pickings back then too. OK if you have other
sources of income and use it to top up when you are outside or nearby.
Whatever you decide remember Rita's 18 month rule.

Turn your gear over every 18 months and minimize the cost of
owner****p. Amortize this cost into every job you do. When you do that,
RE work is going to send you broke unless you just use it to fill the
void, stop the boredom... Sorry Sam, I just had to do it!