Waterfront property

Ascender · May 16, 2015

Here's an aerial real estate video that I just wrapped up. Edited in FCP X with Neumann Inspire LUTs. A few points (excuses, really):

This is my first video production attempt (and first time using FCP X, an iMac, and virtually everything else that I used on this production
It was pretty darn windy when I filmed, so I didn't get as many slow or still shots as I wanted
The client insisted on an early morning shoot for the lighting angle, which casted shadows from my Inspire onto the home (I tried to edit most of them out); that limited some of my shots too
The client only wanted aerial shots to showcase the view, as they already have interior photos; I do believe in balancing works with more than aerial video

Now that I've given my excuses, I invite feedback and I hope to get better with your help.

damoncooper · May 16, 2015

I'm no pro but some initial thoughts:

- the cuts seemed a bit jagged and there didn't seems to be a nice even flow of the piece. Perhaps more mixing of close up with further away shots might help.

- skip the closeup clips looking straight down at a filthy pool. Kinda grossed me out honestly. The house is unlived in which is understandable but high up shots or level shots would present the patio / pool area better I think.

- the sped up clips were used a few times but they didn't seem to add much value frankly. If a speed up is used to reveal the beautiful water views, backing away from the house or similar, that would be be fine, or as a transition between two clips that adjoin otherwise unremarkable footage, by all means use it. But be sure to speed up footage that is smoothly shot. Otherwise the viewer gets the impression it's jittery video.

- I didn't actually SEE much water. As a potential homeowner, I would be interested to know what the view is actually LIKE from the house, from the 2nd story balcony, etc. A fly-out over the house from behind to the water and beyond might have been useful for that.

- the words on screen were a nice touch until they mimicked every word the narrator was saying. I thought they would be a useful device for the highlights but every word became a distraction.

- color was great. I didn't see any jello or artifacting but I didn't watch it on a big screen either.

- in the beginning I actually had a hard time knowing which house was being showcased. Perhaps a smooth fly-in/down from out over the water, or starting with some close-in shots would help the viewer identify the home in the wider shots.

Good stuff! Keep working on it and keep seeking feedback.

Howie_UK · May 17, 2015

I am not a videographer - but I have purchased a few houses, so I offer this feedback from a buyers perspective - I hope it helps.

Nice house. Your first shot without the text overlay has the wrong house in the centre of the screen - this immediately confuses the viewer. Your third also starts on this property in centre screen. This is a more imposing property than the one for sale and its proximity in the aerial shoot makes it look like it physically overshadows the sale property.

The sweeping view of the line of houses does nothing to make the sale property stand out from its neighbours, it has more imposing neighbours. The pan shot should have held the sale house centre screen as the drone physically went from one side to the other. I would recommend going from right to left instead of the left to right shot you did. The large tree on the left (as we look at the front) hides a lot of the property until we are right in front, the tree on the other side is smaller so it gives an earlier and improved view of the property frontage. but I think the sped up video makes the road look very busy, and it is in contrast to the traffic flow on the slower shots - but the fast ones are very early into the fim and have already planted that negative impression. Maybe going even earlier would have reduced the flow of traffic in shot.

A difficult house to film due to the trees and proximity to its neighbours, which has obviously limited your angles. These limitations show in the amount of repitition each of your shots give. Straight down shot of the roof does nothing for the video. I would shorten the sequence - sometimes less is more.

As @damoncooper mentioned, seeing the view the potential buyer would see from the house would have helped. It is all about the overall package, especially in a location like that. I know you did a pan at 35 seconds in, but it is lost by of all those cars still in shot driving super speed to and from the city. For a water property, trying to film the water when there is a power cruiser or two in the area would have helped - but unless you have hours or even days, I would be the first to acknowledge that isn't always possible. Maybe an angled overhead of a jogger on the path (not showing the road) to sell that as being on the doorstep.

The straight down on the pool does not help this property- a low angle showing the pool surface and the house beyond may have been preferential.

There are some great shots that give a feel of the true style of the property, especially the closer ones.

It is easy for others to pass comment on your work, especially when we look for utopia. you have already explained some of the difficulties imposed on you. y\ou may feel deflated, but I know if I had filmed the same sequence you would have been able to give me at least double the feedback on areas I could have improved.

Best regards

Ascender · May 17, 2015

Howie_UK said:
I am not a videographer - but I have purchased a few houses, so I offer this feedback from a buyers perspective - I hope it helps.

Nice house. Your first shot without the text overlay has the wrong house in the centre of the screen - this immediately confuses the viewer. Your third also starts on this property in centre screen. This is a more imposing property than the one for sale and its proximity in the aerial shoot makes it look like it physically overshadows the sale property.

The sweeping view of the line of houses does nothing to make the sale property stand out from its neighbours, it has more imposing neighbours. The pan shot should have held the sale house centre screen as the drone physically went from one side to the other. I would recommend going from right to left instead of the left to right shot you did. The large tree on the left (as we look at the front) hides a lot of the property until we are right in front, the tree on the other side is smaller so it gives an earlier and improved view of the property frontage. but I think the sped up video makes the road look very busy, and it is in contrast to the traffic flow on the slower shots - but the fast ones are very early into the fim and have already planted that negative impression. Maybe going even earlier would have reduced the flow of traffic in shot.

A difficult house to film due to the trees and proximity to its neighbours, which has obviously limited your angles. These limitations show in the amount of repitition each of your shots give. Straight down shot of the roof does nothing for the video. I would shorten the sequence - sometimes less is more.

As @damoncooper mentioned, seeing the view the potential buyer would see from the house would have helped. It is all about the overall package, especially in a location like that. I know you did a pan at 35 seconds in, but it is lost by of all those cars still in shot driving super speed to and from the city. For a water property, trying to film the water when there is a power cruiser or two in the area would have helped - but unless you have hours or even days, I would be the first to acknowledge that isn't always possible. Maybe an angled overhead of a jogger on the path (not showing the road) to sell that as being on the doorstep.

The straight down on the pool does not help this property- a low angle showing the pool surface and the house beyond may have been preferential.

There are some great shots that give a feel of the true style of the property, especially the closer ones.

It is easy for others to pass comment on your work, especially when we look for utopia. you have already explained some of the difficulties imposed on you. y\ou may feel deflated, but I know if I had filmed the same sequence you would have been able to give me at least double the feedback on areas I could have improved.

Best regards

Howie- thank you. I am not deflated, as this type of honest feedback is what I'm soliciting in order to get better. Trust me, I've seen how brutal this group can be on posted videos, but I need to hear constructive criticism.

Ascender · May 18, 2015

Ascender said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Here's an aerial real estate video that I just wrapped up. Edited in FCP X with Neumann Inspire LUTs. A few points (excuses, really):

This is my first video production attempt (and first time using FCP X, an iMac, and virtually everything else that I used on this production

It was pretty darn windy when I filmed, so I didn't get as many slow or still shots as I wanted

The client insisted on an early morning shoot for the lighting angle, which casted shadows from my Inspire onto the home (I tried to edit most of them out); that limited some of my shots too

The client only wanted aerial shots to showcase the view, as they already have interior photos; I do believe in balancing works with more than aerial video

Now that I've given my excuses, I invite feedback and I hope to get better with your help.