Lightroom vs. Photomatix vs. Lighting

Sometimes it can be hard to tell exactly what an interior design photographer does, without knowing what to look for it can even be hard to recognize a highly skilled architectural photographer. The photos look great but it seems like all they do is shoot the natural light. I look at tons of interior photography in books and shelter magazines and often the photographers are so good at hiding their efforts, that I wonder if they light at all. So I have decided to try using only natural light and compare the results to my usual technique of combining several exposures. For natural light I tried two different techniques. The first technique used a single exposure, exposed a little dark to catch the highlights outside of the window. Then in Lightroom I dodged the image to remove a bit of exposure to bring up the light in the room and match it with the window. I raised the shadows and reduced the highlights to bring the dynamic range under control. The second technique was to bracket, shooting several exposures from light to dark and then combining the pictures in an HDR program called Photomatix. In Photomatix I used the exposure fusion which tends to give more realistic results and is sort of a milder form of HDR. Exposure fusion is convenient and often preferred by real estate photographers who need to be quick and run-and-gun.

I was surprised at how well the single image in Lightroom turned out. It is a bit flat.

I was surprised at how well the single image in Lightroom turned out. It is a bit flat.

This image is the exposure fusion version and the results are very similar to the single lightroom exposure. Both images were difficult to color balance. Both image are also painfully flat.

This image is the exposure fusion version and the results are very similar to the single lightroom exposure. Both images were difficult to color balance. Both image are also painfully flat.

For this shot I bounced strobe light around the window to give a sense that the light in the room was coming from the window. Using layer masks I combined the lit images with the natural light to give dimension without feeling too "lit".  …

For this shot I bounced strobe light around the window to give a sense that the light in the room was coming from the window. Using layer masks I combined the lit images with the natural light to give dimension without feeling too "lit".  Just as I thought, I do prefer the lit version, it seems to have more volume. Probably the best place to see the difference is to look at the bed reflected in the mirror. In the lit version the bed looks great all of the textures show well and the shadows on the wall are softer and more pleasing. I also think that the contrast on the chair back gives a truer sense of the object and feels more three dimensional.

Overall it was a fun project, it was shot for the artist that hand finished and refurbished the vanity. I think that this does prove for me that lighting can make all the difference, just as long as it doesn't look "lit".

In the end, lighting did make quite an impact on the final image. While the exposure fusion and single shot are usable I definitely prefer the lit version. In all cases the three versions require some good architectural photography photoshop techniques. More importantly, knowing how and when to light helps me insure that I never have to make a sub-par photo. I can always figure out some way to get the shot even if weather and lighting conspire to ruin the whole day. It is what you should be looking for if you are in the market for a photographer. Sometimes good-enough is good-enough but when it really matters that you get the best shot you really need a professional architectural photographer.

Meet Daniel Jackson.... Big Time Architectural Photographer

A little while back I was asked for images to be featured in the homepage slideshow of the Association of Independent Architectural Photographers. So I sent a few of my finest pictures. A couple of weeks later I went to their site and viola, I feel like a regular Julius Schulman. It is kind of fun to have my work represent the AIAP like this. The AIAP is a really good resource for architects looking to find architectural photographers near them. There are links by state with contact information and it is an easy place to see several portfolios at the same time.

What the Heck is that? Super close-up.

Lately I have been having a lot of fun with my Canon ef 100 2.8 macro lens, I also used a 25 extension tube and a 1.4 extender to get really close to my subject. With a 50mp camera like the 5ds I will be able to crop in really tight for even closer images. At this point I am so close, that it is tough to guess exactly what you are looking at. so here goes, any guesses? It kind of looks like a terry cloth towel or a cool looking textile almost like a sequined dress. Up close it has a texture a bit like scale armor that uses overlapping scales for protection.

Beach towel? Prom Dress? Terri cloth underpants in the aftermath of a tornado in British Colombia?

This is a tough one, it is not a towel. If i pull back out a bit it starts to make a little more sense. Still confusing though, almost like a horse, the colors seem very familiar. There is hair, so it is obviously organic, an animal of some kind.

Mr Ed quietly reading the newspaper as the sounds of children playing dances on the morning air like honeysuckles? A Kite? Bermuda shorts?

Now I am practically giving it away. Patterns of color to provide camouflage from birds and other predators.

Zebra upholstery? A  limited edition ukulele bag signed by the members of Grand Funk Railroad?

If you can't tell yet it is a monarch butterfly wing. 

Getting so up-close and personal can be really difficult. Once the camera is so zoomed in movement is exaggerated, little movements travel up the tripod leg and look like an earthquake. All of this wiggling can lead to blurry photos. A couple of tricks I have learned to keep things sharp are to use a tiny tripod on a solid surface like a cement basement floor. That way the subject and camera are locked together. Using a flash to light can minimize movement too, since the exposure is so short. It can be difficult to get enough light even with a flash because the extension tubes have the effect of lowering the light levels since less light gets to the camera sensor.

These photos have very little depth but that is another item to consider in macro photography. Usually for this kind of image it is smart to shoot multiple images with minute focus changes between each shot, then later the photos can be combined digitally to produce a single image that is sharp all over.

This kind of photography can seem light years away form the architectural photography that I do but in many ways both disciplines are quite similar. They both require pushing the technology to the absolute limit to get the highest image fidelity. They often require uncommon equipment and know how and attention to detail. I also think both are a lot of fun.

Have you got anything you would like to see magnified many times? Let me know what you would like to see and I will take a shot at making a macro of it.