A few days ago I got a large letter in the mail from John and Margaret Hokkanen. They sent out samples of some of their marketing brochures asking for feedback on the photography. A photo editing technique called High Dynamic Range was used on two of the brochures, the other two brochures featured the Hokkanen's incredible photographic skills, but not HDR.
Their question was how much of a difference did HDR make. My first reaction was I don't think the average person would notice any difference, but I volunteered to peel off the stickers indicating HDR or NON-HDR, place the brochures on a table in my office, and ask members of our staff what they thought.
First of all, I just need to say that all four brochures are exquisite. Any client should be thrilled to have their property represented with this kind of high quality professional marketing.
No one could detect the differences in HDR and NON-HDR. But I thought I'd pass along some of the other comments, for what they're worth....
The heavier paper stock used for the Neptune brochure was unanimously preferred. Of course, I know it also costs a good bit more.
Poor Diamond was the least popular. I think probably because the interior decor is less colorful. Assistant Sofie noticed the car visible in the window in the upper right photo. One agent commented that she would have cropped out the water cooler in Diamond's kitchen photo. Assistant Frances was Diamond's one supporter. She said she preferred the softer, gentler colors.
Everyone thought the color cast in Diamond's cover photo had a surreal, almost eerie, quality. I remember that was one of your first HDR experiments.
An interesting design comment that Agent Ann brought up: She loved the circular insert showing the exterior image in the Plover brochure, however she thought the smaller square inserts showing other interior shots were a little too busy and distracting.
Ann, who seemed to think I wanted an in-depth critique, also observed that the shadows under the bed in Hillock "looked smudgy". I threw her out for the rest of the day. :-)
Assistant Mabel chose Plover as her all round favorite.
Partner Bob chose Neptune as his all round favorite.
All in all, I don't think HDR made a big difference. I guess people are more aware of the paper stock, the decor and staging of the rooms, and the overall design of the brochure.
And once more, these are gorgeous brochures!
THANKS CHERYL!! I thought your idea of just showing the brochures without knowing which photos were which was a great idea. There were several reasons for wanting to get some input: 1) inks mix differently than light, especially with greens, which is why I sent paper brochures; and 2) adding HDR components adds a bunch of time, and we wanted to find out if anyone thought it mattered. For anyone who wants to know what the comments were referring to, here are the four brochures:
1. Neptune (printed on 100lb cover stock instead of 100lb gloss text paper - this adds about 50% to the cost of printing)
2. Plover
3. Diamond
4. Hillock
If anyone has desire to get a set of the printed brochures (and hopefully comment on them), just send me a message by clicking on this link: mailto:margaret.ar[at]surftheturf.com Make sure to include your full postal mailing address.
After a few days, I'll give some additional comments on the brochures.
Margaret Hokkanen
I too recieved these brochures, but my mistake was in calling John. He likes to talk as much as I do and we spoke until it was almost time for me to pick up my wife for our (not often enough) date. John and I are both geeks, so we hit it off right away.
My overall conclusion is the same as yours Cheryl. HDR doesn't make the photo significantly better. There are times when HDR is the only way to get the photo, but the time necessary to get the finished product tells me the technique should be used sparingly.
I'm just glad the Hokkanens are not in my market. They would be tough to compete against!
The human eye is a much more remarkable imaging device than any camera. So, in my view, while HDR allows you to produce an image that is closer to what the eye can see, there are no awards for that from the public. They will see that it is a better image, but they will not understand why.
I, too, received the brochures. With or without HDR, they are incredible! Although, I couldn't afford to publish brochures of this quality for some of my listings ~$100K or less, for my high-end listings this is something to aspire to. I'm going to carefully hide these brochures from view lest my clients start demanding this. :) To be sure, I've bookmarked John's post detailing his camera equipment bag and printing operation.
I got a copy of the brochures as well. My comments :
1) Very professional work. John and Margaret are raising the bar. Kuddos to to the surftheturf team!
2) I preferred the non-HDR brochures over the HDR.
Here is some pricing info for those interested in cost. The brochures are 11x17, glossy laminant, folded by machine in the middle. For the regular magazine paper (100lb text), which is actually heavier than that because of the glossy laminant, the cost is $1100 for 5,000 brochures. For the heavier paper that everyone seems to like, the cost is about $1600. The extra cost is primarily the cost of the paper, but also the cost of extra shipping expense.
If you all want to know what we do with all those brochures, just post and indicate that, and I'll do a post that talks about that part of the process. For us, photography is the beginning of a big marketing push, and that's why we put so much energy into the photography. We create the photos ourselves so that we don't incur costs there, and instead spend the money on production and distribution some of which are hard costs and cannot be avoided.
John Hokkanen