This Week In Real Estate Video #34 – Mixing Stills and Video

November 23rd, 2012

20 Piermont Place, Raby Bay, Queensland, AU: This video was shot by Christine Bickley who has been shooting as a professional real estate photographer/videographer in the Brisbane, AU area since the beginning of 2012. Her husband, Graham is an agent. It looks to me like Christine is doing an outstanding job for having been in the business for just 11 months.

4455 Glen Falls Lane, Vail, CO: By John Nilsson. John and I had an interesting discussion about mixing stills with video. I’d not really thought much about why I don’t like stills mixed in with videos but Johns video helped me get in touch with the potential elegance of seeing a quiet scene in video. The movement in property video, even though it is slight, can pull your attention into the scene. The winter creek scene near the start of John’s video is an example. The water sound and slight movements are delightful. Then as you get inside the flickering movement of the fire or slight movement of the vegetation and clouds seen through the windows adds to the experience. But when video switches to a Ken Burns still, I notice it immediately feel cheated! The switch from video to still is particularly noticeable if the white balance of the stills don’t exactly match the white balance of the video or if the image editing is slightly different. All these small details may seem nit-picky to some but in the elegant homes that John is shooting with just a music background where you don’t have someone talking to distract your attention, I think it makes a difference.

How do you feel about mixing stills and video?

Jamie Hill a voice over artist: I was commenting to Malia Campbell this last week how much I liked the voiceover work that Jamie Hill did who narrated her Mercer Island video that I featured last week. Jamie’s voice always stands out to me when I hear it because she narrated the video that Malia shot for the rental my wife and I sold earlier this year in Snoqualmie, WA. Besides sounding great Malia says Jamie is great to work with. So if you are looking for a voice over artist check out Jamie.



Share this

5 Responses to “This Week In Real Estate Video #34 – Mixing Stills and Video”

  • I find the continuing discussion about real estate video very informative. I am investigating this as a new offshoot of my current video business, and while I think there may be some legs to it, I just haven’t seen much happening in this space in my market area.

    Is doing video for homes a viable business? Not a hobby, but can one actually make a respectable living doing videos of houses for sale? My take is people do it here or there, but there’s not enough business to make an actual living at this. I do not do photography, so my main thrust would be video. My gut sense is that it may be a few years or more before video for real estate actually takes off to the point of being able to generate a reasonable income. As anyone who does video is aware, the costs/ time/ effort involved in doing it right is considerable more than still photography generally would be.

  • @Ray – Yes absolutely there are many areas in the world where doing property video can be a viable business. It is very geographically dependent though. If you go back through the posts I’ve done on property videos you’ll see that people are doing well in Brisbane, Vancouver IS, Boston, Orlando, Seattle , Toronto, Asheville, NYC, Auckland and other areas where there is plenty of upper-end property and a large population of agents and buyers that are marketing savvy.

  • I agree… There is a time for mixing in stills but for me it’s usually because my video shot wasn’t good or maybe even forgot to get the shot. I’m shooting my own so I have chose to use stills but I’m not a fan. It’s either a video or a slide show. Christine’s video is great. I don’t particarly care for the transitions but that’s just personal taste. Good job

  • I agree with Jason. At times I use stills because I just don’t have the video shot needed for the piece. But personally, if the stills become too dominant, I’m really turned off and lose interest fast. If still can be blended without detection, then I’m all in.

  • What I like to do sometimes is stay in video mode but not move the camera at all when something in the shot (like a fan or an dog) is already moving. It gives you the feel that’s it’s still “live” because of the natural movement in the scene, and it’s a great way to either change up from movement (slides, pans, etc.) or if – like Jason said – the shot just isn’t there.

    I know that’s not exactly what was stated in this article, but that’s probably as close as I would come. I admit I haven’t tried it yet, but I can’t imagine mixing actual stills (without any movement in the scene) with video. Just my personal preference.

Trackback URI Comments RSS

Leave a Reply