Premium said:
Curious what kind of use people see out in the residential real estate market. I've noticed drone shots on mostly higher end listings.
I was able to use a few myself to list our house up in Denton. If you click on the link the 1st, 2nd and last photos were ones I shot with a Mavic Pro. With a few large trees blocking the house, the professional photographer had an impossible task of getting a shot of the front from ground level. Elevating I was able to get a decent angle as well as showcase the yard and pool.
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2605-Valencia-Ln-Denton-TX-76210/55167025_zpid
Don't know if it helped, but we got 2 above asking offers within about 24hrs of listing on Saturday morning. The competition all had ground shots only.
As a side note, what do people charge for taking drone footage of a house?
In my opinion (which on this particular topic is shared by quite a few RE photographers), drone shots should be used for large estates to show the layout, coastal neighborhoods to show proximity to the water (and should really be limited to the first four or five streets, certainly the first row), or for tricky front elevation shots. The vast majority of homes don't need them. Top-down views of the roof are especially unnecessary.
With that said, I like the way you utilized the drone for your listing because it's not overdone. I disagree that the photographer had an impossible task of getting a shot from the front. That's where pole aerials come into play. That situation is an easy one to overcome - he/she simply didn't get it done. A 12-16' painters pole would have taken a great shot of your house from that angle. But I like what you did there. Regardless of the tool used, getting the camera up off the ground was the way to go.
I also like the shots you included that show the layout of the backyard, most notably the size and shape of the deck and pool. Again, you didn't put it up in the clouds and shoot straight down on the chimney, which would have caused a lot of eye rolls. Really nice job there.
Like you, I don't know if those shots directly influenced the offers. It's safe to say that they didn't hurt.
As for rates, it varies (market, photographer, number, type, use of video yes/no, etc.). Some charge a flat fee, some by number of images, some by the hour. One of my clients offered to pay for the drone in exchange for free aerials of his apartment communities. That's a little different - I've got a retainer-like agreement with that particular set of properties, so they're sort of paying for it either way.
One example of a rate structure that I've seen people use, and the one I'd personally use for my clients, is a $100 fee for drone usage and $25 for each image. Three shots would be $175. Depending on the client/property, that might be close to the price of just the interior images already, so drone work is obviously more expensive. Of course, there's also additional expenses involved for the photographer as well, from the drone itself to the insurance, training, license, maintenance, and the pain in the butt of bringing additional equipment to an already large pile of gear.
* If it means anything, I like the quality of your drone shots more than quite a few of the "pro" images.