When it comes to interior and architectural photography, there is often much more involved than what meets the eye at first glance. In order to create a photograph that is realistic and enticing, careful planning, staging, lighting and a healthy dose of patience is imperative. In this Fstoppers Original, we dive into a luxury interior shot and see what it takes to construct a mouth-watering interior photo from the ground up.
When shooting an interior, there are many things to take into consideration before I can get close to a final product: interior light levels, exterior light levels, the amount of flash that we want to use, color temperature, composition, who our client is, etc. All of this comes together into two critical questions: "what do I need to show?" and "how am I going to show it?"
For this shot in particular, I was shooting for the homeowners who commissioned a shoot to document their dream house after it had finally been completed. This is important to keep in mind for a couple of reasons, which I will touch on over the course of the article. So without further adieu, let's begin, shall we?
Part 1: Prior to Shooting
The first thing I do when I begin shooting any architectural scene is to take a good walk around and get a feel for the space. Every single scene that I shoot, I want to know the different compositional options available, how the light will affect the scene, where I can place lights if necessary, what interesting architectural features must be shown, and how I should show them. When I first saw this scene, I knew immediately that my compositional options were somewhat limited for the following reasons:
a. I wanted to show the view
b. I didn't want to shoot into a mirror (nowhere to hide myself or the lights)
c. I wanted to show the details of the bar and countertop
Because of what I needed to show, my options were immediately limited. This limitation actually made composing the image a much simpler task. If there is only one option that can accomodate the right composition, I don't need to keep thinking about the perfect vantage point. So with my rough composition selected, I was able to start moving gear into the space and getting set up to create the image.
Part 2: Setup and Gear
When creating an interior image, I try to travel light, which translates to traveling effectively. I personally am always shooting on location, and moving gear around can become a huge hassle. To help myself out, I designed my kit to be quick and easy to both set up and tear down. Here's a quick snapshot of what I'm using. I've labeled it and explained my choices below.
2. 17" Macbook Pro, for shooting tethered. In situations like these, there is so much attention to detail involved that it would simply be impossible (well, much more difficult and frustrating, at the very least) to rely on the camera's LCD alone.
3. Paul C. Buff Einstein, with PocketWizard MC2. A great light at a great price. The MC2 allows me to remotely adjust the power, which is quite useful so I'm not running back and forth around the room adjusting light levels. The MC2 also integrates flawlessly with my Plus IIIs, Flex TT5s and Mini TT1s, for when I need an intricate light setup with speedlights and Einsteins.
4. I've taken a hacksaw to a rolling cart and set it up so that I can place a computer on it. I've also covered it with the fuzzy Velcro so that I can have easy access to my lighting modifiers, which for the most part, are all from David Honl's line of accessories. They're all velcro-based, which makes them easy to use and easy to keep on my "Macguyvered" cart.
5. More Honl modifiers. I use the grids, softboxes, gels, bounce cards, flags and snoots religiously on every shoot.
6, 7, 8. Another Einstein around the corner with a shoot-through umbrella mounted on it. More lights outside - in this case, Q-flash with a diffuser on the left, and a 430exII with a Honl Traveler 18" soft box on the right. Lastly, a 430exII with another Honl modifier on it between the counter and the bar to light up that area. All of my non-Einstein lights in this scene are triggered via PocketWizard Plus III triggers with a Mini TT1 on the camera.
Part 3: Composition, Staging, and Lighting
As I mentioned earlier, my composition had more or less been chosen for me, as the only composition that shows all the necessary elements would be quite near to the camera's position (which you can see in the set up image above). From here, it's a matter of fine tuning. I also took the liberty of staging the scene to make for a more pleasing photograph. I'll go through the lighting and staging process step by step so you can get a feel of how the scene evolved.
In terms of staging, I ran into a couple minor problems that were easily smoothed over for this scene. First was the fact that the chairs outside the door that were originally in the shot were very, very in the way of the exterior scene (see below).
- First, it is facing out of the frame and leads to nothing, which creates some serious tension when viewing.
- Secondly, it doesn't let your eye move naturally from the foreground to the background; its presence acts as a magnet, drawing your attention away from the flow of the space.
- The last reason for removing the chair was a practical one: I placed an Einstein with an umbrella directly to the left of the chair (Labeled '6' in the above setup shot) to illuminate the barstools and floor. Because of the chair's position relative to the umbrella, it cast a pretty ugly and unnatural shadow right into the middle of our scene. Out with you, chair!
After I had these main problems taken care of, I got to work on the details: repositioning items on the counter, adding some flowers for color and interest, repositioning the rug to just the perfect spot, and making sure everything was lined up for the final shot.
In order to light an interior scene that happens to contain windows or open doors, you will need to balance the interior light levels with those of the exterior. In this case, If I were to come in and try to shoot this without lights, I'd be in trouble. Exposing for the interior leaves the exterior looking like Gandalf The White just rolled into town, and if I expose for the exterior, it looks like I'm finally coming to the end of a journey through the Mines of Moria. I've labelled the meter readings for the interior and exterior below. I'm only slightly exaggerating, I swear.
To light the exterior (labeled '8' in the setup photo above), I placed a Quantum Q-Flash on a stand high and to the left to play the part of sunlight streaming over the patio. By varying the light from soft to hard from the foreground to the background, I added another dimension and a certain amount of believability to the scene. For the finishing touches, we put a 430exII with a PocketWizard Plus III opposite the Q-Flash. The 430exII had a Honl Traveler 16" soft box attached to it, and filled in the exterior couches with an inviting light, somewhat of a foil to the hard light coming from the left.
Here's a shot with nearly all of the above mentioned lighting and staging in place:
Not bad, right? But there are still a few problem spots, which brings me to...
Part 4: Finishing Touches
The horizontal window above the door frame was showing a very underexposed ceiling, and because my shutter speed and aperture are dialed up to expose for the exterior, I was not getting a very natural glow from the lights. To combat this, I took a frame that was exposed for the home's interior lights, and in Photoshop, used a mask to brush back in some of the warm glow from those lights. I did the same with that ceiling outside - just a tad goes a long way to livening it up.
After all of these steps, I still wasn't 100% satisfied with the image. The outdoor infinity pool was a little bit overexposed, and the weather on that day wasn't perfect. I replaced the sky via a quick mask, being sure to cover my tracks and take care of the sky in the mirror as well. To fix the pool, I drew around the edge with the pen tool, made a selection, and applied a curves layer to give it some color and keep the highlights in check.
After I was happy with the flash lighting, the ambient lighting, the sky, the pool, and everything else, I merged everything to a new layer and corrected my vertical lines (when you try this, making sure that your vertical lines are parallel with the edge of the frame is a must for any serious architectural photograph), as they were just a tad off directly out of the camera. The finished shot can be seen below:
I hope that you learned something from reading about what it took to create this image. It's quite a bit of work, and involves nitpicking many small details. Shooting interiors is a great way to hone your lighting skills, as each shot is like solving a giant puzzle, and no two rooms will ever be lit the same way. Maybe you'll even be inspired to try some of these ideas on one of your shoots in a different genre.
If you want to try an interior or architectural image of your own, I'd be glad to offer feedback and help with lighting, staging and composition. Feel free to get in touch with me via the Fstoppers Facebook group, or by contacting me through my architecture and real estate photography website or Facebook page, which features many shots in the same style.
If you liked this post, let us know! I would be happy to break down more architectural and interior images in this style in the future. Everything from simple one-light shots, to entirely ambient shots, to more complicated setups like this one: it's all fair game, and I could talk about it for days.
Very informative. Thats way interiors always look much more brighter in adds. I used to wonder how they get the perfect exposure to light the room and show the outside. Assumed that it was done something like its shown. Good to know!
Why not just use an HDR method to get the perfect exposure for each part of the scene and not even have to worry about light levels, it seems like that would be just as much Photoshop work as what he is currently doing.
HDR alone is typically really ugly and unnatural. A bounced light is a better option if you have it.
HDR can be very natural and understated if you nail the settings.
Then it is almost NEVER nailed. I did a google image search of "interior HDR" and it all looks horribad.
HDR is a matter of taste. Some people like an effect with more presence. Some like it more subtle. It's up to you. I've seen quite a few interior HDR shots that "nailed it".
I'm not against lighting the scene yourself, not at all.The only question is - are you happy with the lighting, or do you want to manipulate it with your own lights. That's it. Some times a good HDR is all you need. Some times you want to capture the light as the architecht planned it would seem.
Most architects wouldn't be very happy with the 'painter of light' look in their portfolio. HDR is still not ready for prime-time, except for cheesy landscape pics and cheap real estate agents.
You're all confusing HDR with tonemapping. High Dynamic Range can be achieved in two ways, by tonemapping (what we commonly refer to as HDR and can look very bad if not done right) and by layers and masking. You can mask and blend multiple exposures and make it look very good. To simply say lump these two methods of achieving High Dynamic Range is wrong. They are different approaches yielding completely different looks.
True, but adding lighting to these techniques early bumps the image into excellent territory.
This is doing exactly that, but not allowing a program decide where to boost the shadows and where to mute the higlights. Even well done HDR is easy to pick out.. painting in layers by hand with different exposures will give you much more control.
HDR might have looked natural if the outside light levels and inside were close in exposure but due to the 4 stop + light level differences, that would have looked horrible with HDR and require at least 7-9 frames. I use HDR if my light is within 2 stops from my darkest area to lightest area. This will still look natural and saves a ton of time.
I just shot photos of my home for a real estate listing and could have used some of the tips here. Excellent [BTS].
For a lower cost solution. I use a bounced SB800, Nikon D90 with Tokina 12-24mm F4 lens. I then adjust and correct in Lightroom. I typically shoot under exposed, bounce the flash off a wall or ceiling backwards to avoid shadows and then add fill light within reason in Lightroom. I under expose to avoid blown highlights from windows. I will bring up the blacks if needed and correct for distortion. Unfortunately most people aren't going to pay the money to have this sort of pro level shoot done. Wonderful article though and great way to show how to get it right "in camera".
If you already went into photoshop, why not just shoot it HDR and be done with it! What a massive bother and terrible flow... If you're already applying masks and replacing the sky, don't go through all that trouble with exposure.
I think if he had cut down the ambient outside by half a stop more, he could have used the outside without replacing the sky with just some simple curve adjustments. HDR would not have worked with such a huge exposure difference. Works well for getting an extra 1-2 stops of light but this looks like he is balancing more than 4 stops of exposure difference between outside and in. That would have been brutal looking with HDR. Plus, with all that white, you would probably have tons of halos
Thanks for this. Very insightful.
HDR makes interiors look like video games and not photographs. I really dislike the look and I don't think it does interiors justice at all.
Here's a quick shot I took of an office.
Crappy Tamron with a mounted 430EX bounced.
Thanks for posting this Mike. I am happy to see another photographer doing great work actually lighting interiors rather than relying on HDR. I light interiors this way and I think the final images are much cleaner and more professional
Thanks for the break down Mike! Fantastic to see the effort and thought processes that go into a shot like this.
This is awesome. However, when I shoot real estate, I have about an hour to shoot the entire property, so I wouldn't be able to work this way. HDR does NOT have to look like a video game. The only thing I use it for is to combine the images. You can still edit it independently.
Entirely different market josephp! There is a market that wants images that can be created in an hour and a market that will pay for the photographer to take some time and do it the best way possible.
Hey Mike! Good to see a post from you! It's Joe, the guy who assisted you for the Julia Dean Workshop interior/exterior shot!
Hey Joe! Good to hear from you :) Add me on facebook, I lost your card and would like to show you the images. Facebook.com/mikekelley
This is great if you have the time to do a proper setup, however I still feel that you can achieve similar results doing HDR in Photoshop. And no I'm not talking about fixing it, but using the tools provided. This is especially useful for anyone shooting real estate interiors.
Great article, very helpful. Props for taking the time to light it instead of do lazy HDR work :)
Mike, nicely written article to back up a nicely composed shot. It would be extremely cool to see your best attempt at an HDR version of the same shot and also a "painting light with remote flashes" version of this shot. It would be impractical to actually show those comparisons but I would be interested in hearing your opinion of how the final photos would have differed. For example, would it be impossible to do smooth exposure transitions in HDR?
Love it. Thanks. And yes MORE please!
HDR? By itself without any supplementary lighting? No way. Please note the examples illustrating the dynamic range of the ambient lighting. HDR would yield a sorry, muddy mess, unsuitable for serious professional photography.
Clearly, all of you people complaining about HDR haven't seen it used well with a non-tonemapping workflow like LR/enfuse.
I, along with David, own the Enfuse GUI/LR plugin/Photomatix Pro/whathaveyou.
There is absolutely no way that HDR (Enfuse) could handle the dynamic range of this scene.
David is also super, super legit - more legit than me :) I'd trust his opinion on this.
This was brilliant. Unfortunately I have to echo some of the comments: I just don't get paid enough to justify the time spent (and equipment!!). I wish magazine editors would read what it takes to do a truly professional shoot like this.
I shoot much interior/exterior for estate agents and the way I shoot is much more simpler and the result is maybe not as perfect, but a much more faster way and with an acceptable result. I shoot like 20-40 pictures at one house and get like 120 dollars, therefore I just put one hour on every house, plus editing. There are two pictures from a house I shot earlier today attached.
These are nice, especially considering your time constraints.
would love to know how you did these :)
These are well done, but they are technically way easier to shoot than the situation Mike had to deal with in his example. Also, his article deals with interior architectural photography, not real estate photography, which generally has much lower standards and is more concerned with simply showing spaces rather than dealing with the architecture and/or the interior design.
I'm assuming that most (all?) of the HDR nay-sayers here are not architectural photographers who have tried it. Having taken classes from professional arch photogs who use HDR quite successfully, I would have to disagree that it isn't an option - it is used quite regularly. One example:
I use HDR occasionally, when I can't hide lights or the space is simply too big (though I want to distinguish between that crime against humanity known as tonemapping, versus exposure fusion). I use exposure fusion when I have to, and sometimes I'll blend a fused image with a flash image. The problem that arises is that HDR still can't handle scenes with a VERY wide dynamic range - like this one. I have bracketed exposures from the shoot and as David said, it's a muddled mess because of the insane difference in the lighting levels between the inside and outside. There are definitely times when HDR just doesn't cut it, and there are also times when using lights just doesn't cut it. The trick is knowing when to, and how to apply, both, for a given situation.
The other issue I have with HDR is that it doesn't let us control the light and create mood or emotion. We have to work with what's in front of us, and you've definitely got less control with HDR. But like I said...knowing how to, and when to use both is the best bet for any serious architectural photog.
great job schmoopty!
Thanks a lot for taking time sharing your work Mike! Really appreciated.
Where did you print your promo-catalogs (saw a pic on your FB page)?
http://stefanhellberg.com for some more architecture inspiration :)
Now that is very good work and a very good post. Top stuff fella!
I think this is a pretty good article. Probably more equipment than most have though. I know this is a luxury shoot though, but most probably wont pay for this.
I would take my speedlites and umbrellas and bounce. I would mount my camera on a tripod and use the bracket feature to take different exposures. Then I would use the layers and paint them in. Dark woods need more light then white floors, etc...
Great post. Love the way it goes through the thought process and adjustments to lightning. Thanks for sharing.
Great post. I'm primarily a portrait photographer, but just got commissioned to photograph the inside of a barber shop and I wasn't sure how I would approach the scene. This is exactly what I needed; detailed, concise and with great examples. Thanks!
It's funny how 3D modeling software tries to look more photorealistic while some HDR photographers want their photos to look more like 3D renders.
Check out http://lightingforrealestatephotography.com/ by Scott Hargis for a great video tutorial series (paid) on how to get it right in-camera (without window replacement or HDR). It's been really helpful for my real estate work.
interesting piece Mike... in my opinion, it doesnt matter how you achieve the effect (HDR or lights, or, in my case a mix of both), as long as you end up with something the client wants. I think there is a difference between what US and UK clients want... over here, I think my editorial clients would think the outside (in your image) was too dark... generally we supply images with windows/doors that are 'blown' by a stop or more... looks more natural. Your set up is similar to mine though... I prob use fewer lights though! good work, Mark
great post! thanks a lot!
Nice post and very helpfull for a future assignment. Also I'll give you some extra points for including "Gandalf The White" in the post ;)
an other way to go would be to make two picture, one with correct exposure inside and one outside. Place them in photoshop on two layers with the overexposed on top. Now brush the window out and you will have a great image reasonabally fast. Probably not such a perfect lighting as in this picture but if you are on a budget worth a thought.