How do they do it?

[ChrisH]

I spent yesterday morning in the office of a firm of architects. In their meeting room there was a wall mounted screen showing a slideshow of some of their buildings. These images were really impressive, being of high clarity, sharpness and colour.

Does anyone know how these images are made? Do they require special equipment, such as cameras, lenses etc?

Here are two examples, unfortunately they have not transferred particularly well but hopefully you can see what I mean.

[Saorsa]

They look to me like they were taken with a WA lens with a lot of attention paid to lighting. In the case of the top one by time of day. A Perspective Control lens would improve that one.

In the case of the bottom one the small lights at the base of the columns on the right offer some shadow detail to the columns. I see similar lights on the steps so it may be that they are a part of the lighting arrangement for the home. WA distorioin is less obvious in the second and may actually make the curved staircase more dramatic.

[chauncey]

Less gear driven than skill driven...

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Chris,

I'd be very surprised if the wall mounted display was a greater resolution than 4k (UHD) TV (you don't say how big it was, allowing a guess at ppi) and it may only be HD.

HD TV = 1920 x 1080 (16:9) = 2 MP
UHD TV = 3840 x 2160 (16:9) = 8 MP
4K Cine = 4096 x 2160 = 8 MP

So well within the bounds of shooting with almost any modern DSLR.

Given the display is a 'feature' representing their business; no doubt the monitor was very well set up (i.e. not like the rows of 'em in shops) plus the images were well lit, shot, properly processed and correctly sized & sharpened for the display resolution (this very important). Plus the software to 'slide show' it and a computer plus monitor capable of making the transitions without 'glitching'. Properly done (no doubt not cheap), this can be very impressive.

Considerable skill is needed to bring all the various elements I have mentioned to fruition in the same place at the same time.

That said, I'd have thought you'd have no trouble producing images fit for display on such a device, as could many members here.

[DanK]

I agree; essentially any modern DSLR would be fine. All you need is an appropriate wide angle lens. The rest is all the same as any photography: learning the lighting, framing, postprocessing, etc., that you need to create any given type of image.

[Loose Canon]

My guess Christopher is that at least the bottom shot is a composite. Very common in high-end architecture photography.

Multiple shots combined for the final image such as possibly a base shot, a shot for the outdoors through the glass doors, etc.

One thing that strikes me is the lighting at the top of the pillars on the ceiling. There is no apparent source for this light. This leads me to believe it might be possible that they took some shots somehow lighting these areas and composited it back in. Also a strange reflection on the table below the mirror on the right. Could just happen normally in the room's “built-in” lighting. I can’t tell where its coming from just looking at the shot.

Anyway, just a theory and they are very well done.

[Manfred M]

Chris - take a look at some of the work of a high end architectural photographer, like Mike Kelly.

http://www.mpkelley.com/

Kelly literally works with many, many layers of images (taken from a stationary positions). He lights (using a combination of small flash and studio lights) individual parts of the building; both interior and exterior and then builds up the final image in Photoshop. I've seen some of his videos; absolute attention to detail here.

Special lenses; yes. Perspective correction lenses (a.k.a shift / tilt) are the mainstay of this type of work. I use a Nikkor f/3.5 24mm PC-E lens for a lot of my architectural shots. These lenses eliminate perspective distortion.

[Saorsa]

One thing that strikes me is the lighting at the top of the pillars on the ceiling. There is no apparent source for this light. This leads me to believe it might be possible that they took some shots somehow lighting these areas and composited it back in. Also a strange reflection on the table below the mirror on the right. Could just happen normally in the room's “built-in” lighting. I can’t tell where its coming from just looking at the shot.

Anyway, just a theory and they are very well done.

I think there is a floor light on each side of the pillars. The additional light at the top is where the two lights combine and overlap while the sides are illuminated only by one light.. It makes for a nice 'texture' which links the pillars to the ceiling. The odd reflection on the leg of the table seems to be from a curved table leg reflecting the base of the pillar.

Camera placement relative to the exterior door for centering and the middle step for level is very important here. The other steps can appear to be tipped by the curvature and perspective but the one at eye level has to look flat.

[Loose Canon]

Interesting you brought this up Chris.

Just a couple of days ago I had a peek at these whilst swilling the AM coffee!

When I first acquired some speedlites (around three years ago now) I took an evening to yutz around with a house in the process of learning how to use them.

I think this was in the vicinity of 18 separate shots moving the lights between shots.

Not even close to what I would call “high-end” (more like “hind-end”!) but it was a lot of fun!

I would like to have another go at it sometime!

[ChrisH]

Thanks for all your interesting responses. I shall certainly look into having a crack at trying to produce similar

Regards

Chris