OT: seeking advice realestate videos

williamconifer wrote on 12/28/2003, 6:26 PM
Greets again, hope you all had a great holiday so far.

I am working on a new video project I want to start pitching in my area to Realestate brokers.

In my area of 45,000 people there is one print publisher (the newspaper) that prints the monthly and quarterly realestate guides. There is no printing or publishing competition so the realitors pay what ever the printer says for this and the realestate classifieds in the newspaper.

I want to offer an option for publishing videos on DVD of their homes for sale. My first idea is to work with one of the bigger brokers in my area and create an Open House type DVD. Have 4-12 homes on one DVD (using alot of menus). For each home create Info sheet menus showing MLS info and then do a virtual walk thru created from 40-50 digital stills.

Why digital stills instead of digital video? I can pan an zoom at will using the stills at any time to suit any need. Video shots has to be composed at the time of the shoot and is limited in zooming and controlling motion at edit time. Also good quality 4 megapixal cameras are very high high rez and good in all light conditions compared to video. Digital cameras can be operated by non-professional photographers and still get good results. Video shot by an amature can look shakey, out of exposure and unevely lit. Also I am not a professional (or even very good) videographer (at least not yet) but my wife and I are very good photographers. All realitors look to the internet for lead generation and listing/showing home details. I'm hoping there is still a niche for video in this market. Enough about my ideas/opinions.

Has anybody tried this? What does the market expect/want from you point of view? Is it profitable? Can DVD publishing compete against Internet publishing in marketing realestate?

Thanks
jack

Comments

Spot|DSE wrote on 12/28/2003, 6:37 PM
Many larger cities are doing this. SMG consulted to a group in the Dade County area doing exactly this. They gave the DVD's away at a local mall during a weekend, and send the DVD's out regularly. They had a decent V/O and some nice music underneath.
The benefit of using a still is exactly as you describe it, you don't need a professional cameraman with a dolly and tripod, jib and ball head. Further, you can indeed encode or stream stills more easily due to the limited amount of information. It is also possible to encode Heuris and panoramic information to a DVD if you have the ability to shoot it. Vegas can't stitch it together tho.
The question isn't as much the technology as it is your ability to market this to various real estate companies.
swarrine wrote on 12/28/2003, 8:42 PM
When I did it I went with digital stills. It was about time and lighting for me. I could get through a large house in an hour. You will find that brokers dislike baby-sitting you while you shoot. The less time you spend, the better. (After they got to know me, they just gave me the keys)

Lighting for RE pics is easier with stills than video. Just try to light a video in to a sunny window...

Also, the length of pics can easily be adjusted to whatever the voice over requires. Vegas made that easy.

Cable providers are required by law to provide Public Access, but little known is that they are also required to provide channels that could carry commercial content as well. I never gave anyone a video, I cablecast it.

In my case, I loved the production, but hated the selling. RE Brokers know they have to advertise and still they were a pain in the a$$. The selling took too much time and so I bailed on the project after a year. IMHO this would work in larger towns/cities then what I was in.

williamconifer wrote on 12/29/2003, 10:38 AM
swarrine,

So you were creating video for broadcast over the cablesystem. Did you brand the show to the broker or did you present it as your show? I am assuming that local commercial broadcast was not free, what was the cost for air time?

Was having Voice Overs something they wanted? VO's on alot of the realestate video I see on the web are really corny and can really taint the impression of the house right off the bat for better or worse. I was thinking detailed titles at the bottom of the screen.

What was it about Realestate brokers that made them a pain? Just cost?

BTW I did a 360 degree still made panorama using 12 shots using my Cannon G2 and a stitcher pgm. I put the jpg on the time line and presto a perfect 360. Really slick.

Thanks for the info
jack
williamconifer wrote on 12/29/2003, 10:41 AM
Spot,

Was the group you worked with a group of agents looking to promote the area and it's lisitings or was it a brokerage firm looking to promote only their listings?

Thanks
jack
swarrine wrote on 12/29/2003, 8:15 PM
Did you brand the show to the broker or did you present it as your show? My show, no one broker in my area could or would pay for it.

Was having Voice Overs something they wanted?
Yes, of course. Next best thing to seeing themselves is hearing themselves. While they may whine and cry all day about being on TV, instinctively the good ones realize that self promoting will help selling. Generally speaking that is... :-)

What was it about Realestate brokers that made them a pain? Just cost?
Cost may have been a part, but committment to a contract and then actually getting brokers to take me to a property was the worst.
J_Mac wrote on 12/29/2003, 8:32 PM
This is a link to my friends site. Looks like he uses video tours .com. Stills and pan, crop look goodhttp://www.planomax.com. Could you support the DVD's with the pics n tours on their web site, or yours? Good Luck, John.
Spot|DSE wrote on 12/29/2003, 9:12 PM
Jack,
How did the 360 look as an avi? I've wanted to prank around with this idea, but haven't worked with any stitching program yet. Is there one you'd recommend?
williamconifer wrote on 12/30/2003, 8:34 AM
Spot,

I'm traveling now, when I get back (Friday or so) I'll get you some info as to the pgm.

All I can say now is I was very impressed. There was some distortion with only 12 photos but the stitcher handled it well. Next time I'll use 16 shots. I just placed the JPG (maybe it was a TIF) on the timeline and used track motion to control the speed of the shot. The shot starts with the house in question and ends with it. The experience was amazing imo. very immersive. Slight varriations of exposure between the stitched photos gave it a very cool look. Sort of a 2D/3D thing. Like a moving diorama. I can't help but stare at it.

BTW, Shutterbug had an indepth review of the software I used (and can't remember the name). They have some real good tips on shooting for stitched 360's.

I'll see if I can render that section to a WMV and post it to my site this weekend. It originally took me 30 mins of dinking with it but I had never touched the software so I would imagine my next effort would be pretty quick.

take care
jack

RexA wrote on 12/30/2003, 11:45 AM
Spot,
You mentioned Ulead PI XL, recently, as a good image editor. I agree.

One of its features is stitching. I've used it to make panoramas with up to three images and it worked ok. I don't know how it compares to other programs, but you could try it since you already have it.