Ideal camera height for real estate?

Is there an ideal camera height for indoor real estate shots? If too low, the top of items like tables, beds, etc. aren't visible, and if too high then it looks as if you're looking down into an abyss, if that make sense. I've been eye balling it on location, but would like to know if anyone has established a preferred height for these types of shots. The camera is on a tripod. TIA.

SaltyPeanut said:

Is there an ideal camera height for indoor real estate shots? If too low, the top of items like tables, beds, etc. aren't visible, and if too high then it looks as if you're looking down into an abyss, if that make sense. I've been eye balling it on location, but would like to know if anyone has established a preferred height for these types of shots. The camera is on a tripod. TIA.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure there is a "Ideal" height. You the photographer need to adjust according to what looks good to 1) you and 2) YOUR CUSTOMERS.

I usually shoot between 4 and 5 ft. sometime higher or lower depending on the shot.

High enough that the camera back and lens axis are parallel to the walls. Pick a lens focal length to give you as much of the floor (low furniture, rugs) as you want.

BAK

SaltyPeanut said:

Is there an ideal camera height for indoor real estate shots? If too low, the top of items like tables, beds, etc. aren't visible, and if too high then it looks as if you're looking down into an abyss, if that make sense. I've been eye balling it on location, but would like to know if anyone has established a preferred height for these types of shots. The camera is on a tripod. TIA.

Click to expand...

Consider shooting at a midpoint between the average height male and the average height female in your country.

A height that allows the camera to be level will result in vertical lines looking vertical. If you need to point the camera up or down, you can correct in camera with a tilt-shift lens, or in post processing with Photoshop.

Having the camera at the eye height of your viewer will result in the most natural (and comfortable) looking perspective.

One option is to have the camera level at eye height. If that gives you too much floor or ceiling, then crop in post processing.

Michael Fryd said:

A height that allows the camera to be level will result in vertical lines looking vertical.

Click to expand...

A level camera results in vertical lines being vertical, and height has nothing to do with that.

Michael Fryd said:

If you need to point the camera up or down, you can correct in camera with a tilt-shift lens,

Click to expand...

Neither the tilt or the shift function on a tilt-shift lens does that.

Shifting a lens' position will change the framing of the image - shifting up will show more of the subject that is above the framing limits with the lens movements zeroed but then you lose the lower part of the zeroed positioned framing.

Tilting a lens changes the plane of focus from being parallel to the image recording plane (the sensor or film) to intersecting that plane. In some situations it is extending the in focus area of a subject when the plane of the subject, the tilted plane of the the lens ( the plane perpendicular to the lens axis), and the subject intersect in a line (look up Schiempflug theorem); or you can reduce the area in focus by tilting the lens in a direction that doesn't cause those three planes to intersect.

Michael Fryd said:

or in post processing with Photoshop.

Click to expand...

Certain raw processing programs, I am thinking primarily of the most recent versions of Lightroom but don't want to rule out others, have a "Transform" tool set as well. which let you correct lines in a subject that should be vertical or horizontal. The downside is that you lose or can distort subject area in other part of the original capture. Here's an example, it's a bit extreme but illustrates what a simple vertical transform does


As shot


Using Lightroom CC Classic vertical transform using the far edges of the screens as vertical guides, but not cropped.


Using Lightroom CC Classic vertical transform using the far edges of the screens as vertical guides, but with crop constrained.

Michael Fryd said:

Having the camera at the eye height of your viewer will result in the most natural (and comfortable) looking perspective.

Click to expand...

Agreed

Michael Fryd said:

One option is to have the camera level at eye height. If that gives you too much floor or ceiling, then crop in post processing.

Click to expand...

Agreed! But it is better and generally faster to do a non-destructive crop while doing your raw processing.

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
And follow me on instagram @therealellisv

Ellis Vener said:

Michael Fryd said:

A height that allows the camera to be level will result in vertical lines looking vertical.

Click to expand...

A level camera results in vertical lines being vertical, and height has nothing to do with that.

Click to expand...

You're right. I wasn't clear.

I should have been clear that I was talking about the indirect affects of camera position, not the direct effects.

If the camera is very low, you may be tempted to tilt it up in to get the framing you want. Similarly if the camera is very high, you may be tempted to tilt it down. It is this tilting, not the camera position, that causes the vertical lines not to be vertical.

At some height, the camera will be in a position where you will want to hold it level in order to get the desired framing. This is the height that I was talking about. At this height, you will likely be holding the camera level, and therefore vertical lines will remain vertical.

Ellis Vener said:

Ellis Vener said:

If you need to point the camera up or down, you can correct in camera with a tilt-shift lens,

Click to expand...

Neither the tilt or the shift function on a tilt-shift lens does that.

Shifting a lens' position will change the framing of the image - shifting up will show more of the subject that is above the framing limits with the lens movements zeroed but then you lose the lower part of the zeroed positioned framing.

Tilting a lens changes the plane of focus from being parallel to the image recording plane (the sensor or film) to intersecting that plane. In some situations it is extending the in focus area of a subject when the plane of the subject, the tilted plane of the the lens ( the plane perpendicular to the lens axis), and the subject intersect in a line (look up Schiempflug theorem); or you can reduce the area in focus by tilting the lens in a direction that doesn't cause those three planes to intersect.

Click to expand...

Again, I apologize for not being clear.

If the camera height is such that you need to tilt the camera down to get the desired framing, your vertical lines won't look vertical.

A tilt shift lens will allow you to keep the camera level, and shift the lens to get the desired framing. If you are using the shift function in this fashion, your vertical lines will still look vertical, even though the center of the captured image is not level with the center of the camera.

Ellis Vener said:

Ellis Vener said:

...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I shoot some pretty high-end stuff, for both luxury vacation rentals and finished projects for exclusive interior designers.

My rule of thumb is that eye level creates a very dull perspective, always (well, nearly). Read on...

I'll generally shoot somewhere between stomach and chest height, depending on how much ceiling/floor I'm looking to capture. This makes for a fresh angle, a new look on everyday things. So much of photography is in the mind, photos vying for people's' attention, and they don't always understand what drives them

The one exception is for the kitchen. I don't remember where I saw this bit of psychology, but a kitchen is the one room that people will nearly always be using waist level surfaces (table,counter,cooking) from eye level. Subconsciously, the only comfortable perspective in a kitchen is from eye level. I always stick to this.

Obviously, all this is only for space/room shots. If you're shooting details, there are no rules.

Good luck.

FranzKafka said:

I shoot some pretty high-end stuff, for both luxury vacation rentals and finished projects for exclusive interior designers.

My rule of thumb is that eye level creates a very dull perspective, always (well, nearly). Read on...

I'll generally shoot somewhere between stomach and chest height, depending on how much ceiling/floor I'm looking to capture. This makes for a fresh angle, a new look on everyday things. So much of photography is in the mind, photos vying for people's' attention, and they don't always understand what drives them

The one exception is for the kitchen. I don't remember where I saw this bit of psychology, but a kitchen is the one room that people will nearly always be using waist level surfaces (table,counter,cooking) from eye level. Subconsciously, the only comfortable perspective in a kitchen is from eye level. I always stick to this.

Obviously, all this is only for space/room shots. If you're shooting details, there are no rules.

Good luck.

Click to expand...

You raise a good point. While having the camera at the eye height of your viewer will result in the most natural looking perspective, this may not produce the most interesting photo.

BAK said:

High enough that the camera back and lens axis are parallel to the walls. Pick a lens focal length to give you as much of the floor (low furniture, rugs) as you want.

BAK

Click to expand...

Several people have commented similar to yours, not singling you out or anything.

To clarify, the camera is always "level", or parallel to the floor and walls, as I'm using a wide angle lens. The camera is never looking up or down. I'm just asking about the height.

FranzKafka said:

I shoot some pretty high-end stuff, for both luxury vacation rentals and finished projects for exclusive interior designers.

My rule of thumb is that eye level creates a very dull perspective, always (well, nearly). Read on...

I'll generally shoot somewhere between stomach and chest height, depending on how much ceiling/floor I'm looking to capture. This makes for a fresh angle, a new look on everyday things. So much of photography is in the mind, photos vying for people's' attention, and they don't always understand what drives them

The one exception is for the kitchen. I don't remember where I saw this bit of psychology, but a kitchen is the one room that people will nearly always be using waist level surfaces (table,counter,cooking) from eye level. Subconsciously, the only comfortable perspective in a kitchen is from eye level. I always stick to this.

Obviously, all this is only for space/room shots. If you're shooting details, there are no rules.

Good luck.

Click to expand...

Thanks Franz. Eye level doesn't appeal much to me either, I've been shooting just a notch below yours, between waist and stomach level. I like to balance floor and ceiling equally when possible, but I also find I raise it higher for kitchens for the reasons you describe, been using ~stomach level here or just above counter tops, I'll try eye level next time. Some bedrooms as well, if they have a high bed, so you can see the top of the bed, otherwise it looks as if the camera is too low, even if it isn't relative to the rest of the room, I'm just careful not to raise it too high because then the "bottom" half of the room looks deeper than the top half, if that makes any sense (camera is level, not looking down), eye level does this a bit unless they have high ceilings. High ceilings don't seem to have this effect, since you can tell the ceilings are high and therefore you expect it to look that way, may actually need to raise the camera a bit to balance out the room better. If the camera is a foot off the ground on a normal height ceiling, then I could see the same effect in reverse.

Sounds like I'm on the right track, just need to adjust a little more height in general and be flexible to the room itself and overall tables/ceiling/etc. heights.

That's what I told you.

High enough that there is no camera tilting,

If you put it too high. you need to point it down. Don't do that.

If you put it too low, you need to point it up. Don't do that, either.

BAK

Well yeah, there's something to be said for interesting.

BAK

BAK said:

That's what I told you.

High enough that there is no camera tilting,

If you put it too high. you need to point it down. Don't do that.

If you put it too low, you need to point it up. Don't do that, either.

BAK

Click to expand...

I'm not tilting the camera. The camera never tilts no matter if too low or too high, I simply adjust my height and re-take the shot. There is about a ~2-3 foot height range where the photo looks "ok" to me, and I was wondering if there were any rules of thumb out there, camera height wise, while I keep trying to find my sweet spot.

Note I'm talking about regular shots, and not something like looking down from a 2nd story staircase into a main entry way on a luxury home or some other specific circumstance unique to the home, where I may try something different to capture the space. Haven't bumped into one of these yet, just thinking that in cases like this it might make sense to tilt/look up or down in order to show potential buyers more of a "view" type feel than just what something looks like.

Here's one that looks ok to me. My 1st attempt was too low, and could barely see the top of the bed. Sadly, I no longer have that photo to post here in comparison. Raised camera about a foot, note I would've preferred not to cut off the bed comforter, and could've lowered the camera a few inches, but this is also a limit of my gear in tight spaces, given a crop sensor and 12mm WA lens. I opted to cut off the comforter a little to be able to show the ceiling fan (wasn't worried about showing the entire fan, just that the room has one):

No such thing. I will go much lower in a bathroom than I will for kitchen pictures for the most part. With a living room area I want to provide an eye-level shot but no have issues with tilt distortion (having the camera perfectly level) as it saves a lot of time in post processing which is very important.

This is where a 24mm tilt shift might be ideal but I find that I usually need to use the 14-24mm zoom at a 14mm focal length to get what I want into as few frames as possible. Even with the 19mm tilt shift lens I find myself primarily using the 14-24mm lens.

--
Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and well-fed. -- Herman Melville

calson said:

No such thing. I will go much lower in a bathroom than I will for kitchen pictures for the most part. With a living room area I want to provide an eye-level shot but no have issues with tilt distortion (having the camera perfectly level) as it saves a lot of time in post processing which is very important.

This is where a 24mm tilt shift might be ideal but I find that I usually need to use the 14-24mm zoom at a 14mm focal length to get what I want into as few frames as possible. Even with the 19mm tilt shift lens I find myself primarily using the 14-24mm lens.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing.