On Sun, 6 Dec 1998 12:18:22 -0800, "Charles Loeven" <cpl49@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
jammed all night, and by sunrise was overheard remarking:
> <<Ask yourself: "Why do I use the wide-angle lenses?" If you use the 24 up
> close for its elongated perspective, you are going to miss it. Terribly.
> The 28 just won't cut it. >>
> This is why I have a 28mm in the first place.
> I was shooting upscale homes for sale.
When I sold my house last summer, I offered to shoot the brochure photo,
knowing what these things usually come out like (eg, a snapshot taken by
some realtor).
I took a bunch of shots, ranging from a "whole yard" shot with my 17mm,
a few tries with my 28mm, and finally a panned shot with the 50mm. The
logistics of the shot, like many, precluded my getting far from the
house for less prespective distortion in a whole-house shot.
The final photo I used was a composite of three shot with the 50mm, it
looks so much better than anything done with the wide angles, though I
suspect a tilt lens could have produced something similar. I did this
all on the computer -- scanned in the photos, knitted them together in
Photoshop (the 50mm pans all shot at the same exposure, of course, to
make this idea more practical), and the result was great. It's also
reasonable to use a banner-format shot for the one-page brochure (most
of which don't include a photo at all, and if they do, it's usually a
bad photocopy), and on the Web site, of course. I had a whole-house
walk-through up on my Web site, and the eventual buyers made heavy use
of it. You never quite know if any one thing makes a big difference, but
I suspect this all helped.
--
Dave Haynie | V.P. Technology, Met@box Infonet, AG | http://www.metabox.de
Be Dev #2024 | NB851 Powered! | Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000, PIOS One
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|