Menu

The Lodge at Steamboat Springs – by Charlie Dresen

February 1st, 2019

Share this

15 Responses to “The Lodge at Steamboat Springs – by Charlie Dresen”

  • Where are the rappers, sports cars, champagne and girls?

  • Kind of a fun study of the continuous uninterrupted take – which is freakin hard to wrap your head around when shooting. It’s harder to do well then you think. Great job!

  • Hey Tim – as a creator and agent, I try to edit my videos with specific buyers in mind – based on price-point and property type. And as we know, not every buyer is a wealthy 28 year old male. So yes, thanks for not docking me down for not including those stereotypes ; )

    Kelvin – Yes, it took several takes because of differing white balance and those darn mirrors. CD

  • Hey renaissance man, knowing this project is ancillary to your main line of work makes it even more impressive!

  • I think it is probably well done for the genre, but I am not keen on the “hose it all down with a stabilizer” style of shooting. Too many ramp speeds necessary, too much repetition of content and much unnecessary detail blank of walls for me. But I really like the introduction, the detail, the steaming waters, all setting the environment in which the condo (it is a condo right?) exists. The other problem with the continuous walk throughs in structures with different colored lighting is that unless you are using the very unreliable auto color, you get warm rooms leading to cool ones or the opposit. If you break up the takes/clips, you can correct that color.

    That repetition of content, the duplication of non important content and the time it takes to work your way down the hall way means the video gets much longer than it needs to be even with ramp speeds. Today in the age of attention deficit syndrome on the internet, it is wiser to keep a video as short as possible. Personally I produce two for my clients: one at 45 +/- seconds for social media, then a longer, fuller, more leisurely one that is as long as necessary to fully cover the property for those who want to see more once their interest is captured by first the stills then the “teaser” short video. I would think this property would be a good candidate for that treatment.

    I am envious of the videographer’s ability to keep the walking thorough clips very smooth and even. Tricky at best to not have that camel effect where the camera, even on a gimbal, moves up and down with each step. Hard to master even if you can master the Tennessee Walking Horse glide or as another photographer called it the “marching band pacing”, heel to toe.

    So yes, very professional and well done for the genre. The question is is this genre the best way to show a structure? And yes, this is just my opinion which is about all we have in this rapidly changing visual field for RE marketing. So others will have a very different take I know.

  • Really nice job – your verticals are very vertical would you mind giving details of equipment used please.
    Thanks in anticipation.

  • Hey Peter – While I honestly don’t disagree with your comments, and find them constructive, I’ll add two comments in my defense: 1. I hate making the same video twice. So I’m always looking for new ways to show a property. I hadn’t done a long take in a while so I just wanted to try it. 2. Real estate videos are NOT just for entertainment. They are to show a property in an engaging way. I’m guessing those that are really interested in the property will appreciated some repetition and will also watch a longer video.

    Fancy cars and bikinis get views and attention, but they don’t always portray how a home lives. All the best – CD

  • Really great work Charlie nailed it production wise and also marketing direct to your client base I reckon – Fav shot the opening over town at night gave me feelings of watching “Polar Express” on Christmas Eve, kind of a tradition for my family and I cause it’s so so hot here 😉 Nice work mate!

  • For those who are not aware, Charlie is a realtor and this is one of his listings. I don’t particularly like the idea of a venue such as this being used as a direct promotional platform for a real estate agent, but it is of course Larry’s choice to do with his blog as he wishes. Some may think I am splitting hairs if I do not object to showing branded real estate marketing materials in other contexts, and of course this blog is hardly likely to be a place where people go to look for properties to buy, but it still seems inappropriate to me somehow.

    In any case, I do not really see the point of featuring this video. There is nothing exceptional or instructive about it and it is technically and aesthetically pretty ordinary, as far as typical real estate video goes.

  • I can’t help thinking how much useful information could have been conveyed with an intelligent voice-over in lieu of the music. I doubt that I’m alone in finding the music annoying.

  • @ Joe Zekas – Welcome to the world of MLS/IDX regulations. While the Rules and Regs vary by location and I have no idea what they are in Colorado, locally even a voice-over would be a fineable offence. Actually, Charlie’s walkthrough is about the only type of video that is allowed as people (Realtor, owners, actors, etc) typical of a lifestyle video and even text are prohibited. In reality, those rules do a disservice to the Realtor members themselves…but the Realtor’s don’t recognize or question it. An example would be the Realtor’s nightmare client that wants to micro-manage everything and attend every showing – and cluelessly insert something that ruins the sale. A very constructive alternative would be an owner interview video where they hit their key points (in a controlled manner) – cameo shot introducing the owners but using their edited dialog as the audio with B-roll breakout to the room(s) they are talking about. Of course you edit out your interview question (What did you like about living here, what attracted you to the house, etc) and train them how to answer with something useful – not “Yes I agree” to a question that is edited out. How powerful is that, satisfying the nightmare client where they get their ideas out to prospective buyers negating the need to be present…but the local MLS won’t allow it. You essentially have to make 2 videos (re-using some clips) using the more complete prohibited video on alternate marketing sources. Another thing I have to caution Realtors on is branding where their YouTube channel is their name is in the expanded definition of branded.

    While it varies locally, the Rules and Reg of my primary MLS is online AND word searchable. The ultimate irony is that “Video” doesn’t have hits, where multiple exist for “photograph and tour”. They essentially use that wording for video – “Photos, images or virtual tours may not contain company or agent logos, agent photos, commissions, bonuses, contact information for the agent or office, text, or graphics of any kind (with the exception of the MFRMLS watermark) in the virtual tour or photo sections. Only photographs, site plot, property sketch, property line art or survey of the property can be entered in the virtual tour and all photo fields. All content including remarks, virtual tour photos and images must be owned, purchased or licensed by the listing broker/agent, from the content owner.”

  • Oops, looks like they recently amended the regs pasted above and removed references to people other than the agent and audio voice-over, still prohibiting the agent. So that scenario I mentioned earlier would now be allowed. That is good news for me. Just couldn’t have a cameo of the Realtor at the end (or anywhere else) in the video. Would love to see them get rid of that too, or at least, like recently allowed virtually staged photos, have mandatory verbiage. Every video would have a call to action statement at the end – Cameo of the agent saying “For question and to arrange a private showing, contact (Listing Agent)” – watered down version they could mandate – “or the Realtor of your choice”.

  • I’m familiar with MLS restrictions, Larry, but they’re not relevant to my point.

    The video you featured is hosted on YouTube, where the music likely kills viewership.

  • Nice work Charlie. I hear what Peter’s saying re the downsides of one-shot POV films – particularly in terms of the repetition of angles – but also I hear you re not wanting to do the same film over and over again. Re featuring the video here at PFRE, I disagree with David, and think it’s great. It’s always much harder to get interest / interaction on PFRE re video than stills and Charlie your piece has kicked off a really interesting conversation on a number of issues key to the sector. Perhaps one thing to consider (Larry / Brandon?) is to add some context to a video case study such as this as opposed to just posting the link? How the film was made / what the film maker was trying to achieve etc.

  • Thanks for the feedback Hamish. Always appreciated.

    Shot on a Sony a7sii with a ZEISS Batis 18mm f/2.8 all mounted on a Movi M5 and a SmallHD Fucus 5” on the Movi for focus, WB and verticals. I shot manually and calibrated the WB to find what looked best inside while trying to keep the colors true for exterior exposure. Shot in 4K @ 24p. Some of the b-roll was shot using a Canon EF 85mm. The earlier shots of the hot tub & pool were 1080 @ 120p and the drone shots were the Mavic 2 pro. Some of the fill shots were from my iPhone10 (people walking and entrance).

    Edited in Premiere Pro CC. Given the price point and location and age of the condo, I feel the buyers might be somewhat younger and therefore I chose the music to appeal to those demographics. And thus, the editing / cuts was a little faster as well. The hardest thing I find is moving the camera slow enough when shooting to really have time to take in the space. When shooting at 24p, I find that slowing that footage down gets a little jumpy. Yes, I shot this with the final edit in mind – Moving slow when panning the rooms but moving faster when I’d transition to a new space. And yes, because of the mirrors and reflections in the shower glass, I did several takes. But it all was shot in the golden window of about 20 minutes.

    Hope that adds some value. Please contact me should you have additional questions. And David – I’ve been a contributor to this site since 2008 and do so with my creative hat on only.

    Cheers

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply