Sure, we can call anything "Frank Lloyd Wright"

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
SDR
Posts: 19304
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

That's bizarre. Isn't it ?

SDR

DRN
Posts: 3942
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Post by DRN »

I was under the impression that a digitized model (seen as an orientation plan on a black background) was made through the use of a series 3D imaged panorama shots taken throughout the house that collect data and tie themselves together via GPS location of the camera. The pictures are real...the merging or moving between the panorama shots is the "fake" part. The remote control drone fly in is of the real house...the night shot may or may not be actual.

It does have an off "feel". I can't imagine a realtor could ethically present a house with only a virtual idealized model showing none of the actual conditions.

SREcklund
Posts: 814
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:24 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA

Post by SREcklund »

Paul Ringstrom wrote:
The "process" is a 3D digital creation of the house because it is a video tour of a digital model, not the actual house.
It doesn't seem digital to me ... I think it's a series of real photos stitched together to create the "video" presentation. The ghosting happens when the transition process isn't as smooth as one would like, or there are differences in the images (watch the placesettings change from shot to shot in the dining room and kitchen). It's effective, but a little over the top - perhaps a nice adjunct to a more traditional photographic presentation.
Docent, Hollyhock House - Hollywood, CA
Humble student of the Master

"Youth is a circumstance you can't do anything about. The trick is to grow up without getting old." - Frank Lloyd Wright

SDR
Posts: 19304
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Clearly the available technology is advancing in this area, leaving at least some of us confused as to what we are seeing. I find the cobbled-together quasi-3D
plan view, made from actual room photos and able to be navigated (so some degree) from birds-eye to perspective views of interiors -- analogous to Google
views -- is particularly ugly and unfortunate, as I see it.

SDR

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

None of the still photos on the Realtor.com website or the video fly-thru show the wear and tear that inevitably occurs over the course of the life of a twenty-five-year-old house. These images are pristine digital re-creations plane and simple.
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

SDR
Posts: 19304
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I don't see anything in the photos that does not look to me like a freshly painted house presented for sale. The furnishings and decorative effects look
like real items; there is enough irregularity in cabinetry woodgrains to suggest to me that they are not digital recreations. The earliest shots of the entry
porch show irregular tile and brick . . .

If there is proof to the contrary, I will be interested to hear it. In the meantime, the scenarios proffered by Stan and Dan make sense to me.

SDR

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

OK, Stan and DRN are right and I was wrong.

This house was obviously de-cluttered before the process described below.

After a little research I found that skyshots757.com was the firm that put together that presentation. They used a combination of drone photography and a fantastic 3D photo scanning process by a company called Matterport (matterport.com) which can photograph a 2,000 sf house in less than a half hour and can put together the video fly-thru and accurate b/w dimensioned 2D floor plans and the 3D floor plan visuals that are included in the video we watched, all of which can be produced and uploaded to the cloud in a matter of a few days.

Amazing and very easy to use technology that should be considered by many realtors interesting in marketing high-end properties.

This technology should be used by the FLWBC to document, for their archives, the built FLW houses.
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

SDR
Posts: 19304
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Thanks for that research, Paul, and the coherent description of the process.

Now if only the real-estate industry consumers of this technology cared enough about truth -- in advertising, in architectural accuracy -- to insist on more
realistic photography. This video (that address again: https://www.realtor.com/realestateandho ... 2897-44602 )
exhibits an extreme example of "wider is better" -- exactly corresponding to the auto print ads of the mid-century era, where the oval wheels and tires of
cars seen in side elevation were the dead giveaway that the vehicles were "stretched" to make them look longer and lower (itself an ideal of auto design
stretching far back in the history of the breed, apparently. Wright was right -- again ?).

The attempt to provide building plans that contain visual cues -- colors, furnishings -- that are readable by the layman, and that provides a way for each
room on that plan to be studied in detail -- is notable, if the technology is still in its infancy. This aspect of the offered technology recognizes the fact that
viewers of architecture need help in translating the floor plan into spacial reality, a problem only poorly addressed until now ?

SDR

DavidC
Posts: 7712
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


DavidC
Posts: 7712
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


DavidC
Posts: 7712
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


Roderick Grant
Posts: 10129
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Was that an ad for a house on the market or a preview of a reboot of "Little House on the Prairie"?

DavidC
Posts: 7712
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


DavidC
Posts: 7712
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


Roderick Grant
Posts: 10129
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

This is an example of a sales pitch that might benefit from the inclusion of a floor plan. Judging by the photos, the spaces in this house seem to be static. It isn't a bad house, but is a boring one.

Post Reply