Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I saw a 7mm listing in Ft Lauderdale where they photoshopped the color of the water in the canal. It is a brownish water canal yet in the pics it was bluer like the ocean.
In a foreclosure listing they colored the pool blue (it was green) which is ok. The aerial photos showed the pool was swamp green but the patio shots showed a nice blue pool.
I saw a 7mm listing in Ft Lauderdale where they photoshopped the color of the water in the canal. It is a brownish water canal yet in the pics it was bluer like the ocean.
In a foreclosure listing they colored the pool blue (it was green) which is ok. The aerial photos showed the pool was swamp green but the patio shots showed a nice blue pool.
I would not change the pool color unless seller was offering to clean and/or repair it, or an allowance to do so.
The listing photos have one purpose, and that is to generate traffic.
That said, use of Photoshop to alter reality to remove material defects is not acceptable.
And, "Foreclosures are for Rich People." Really.
I think photos are very important in consumers' decision making processes. They do not just serve the purpose of getting people to the house as you suggest.
An example might be:
View photos and decide whether or not to do a viewing.
See house (and others) live.
Go home and look at the photos of the 3 houses you liked the best from the viewings.
Reject House C after looking again at the photos coupled with your memory from the viewing. Nope, not really your style.
Review photos again of House A and House B. Can't really decide both have pros and cons.
Tell agent you're most interested in House A. Email link to photos to your parents 500 miles away, and your best friend. Can't wait to hear what they think about it.
Parents view the photos. They love it and tell their daughter. Buyer feels reassured.
Start to talk about offer prices with agent. Look at photos again when thinking about what to offer. It's more than we want to spend. Is it worth it? Stare at the photos.
Make offer and offer accepted. Email photo link to a few more family members and some of your closest friends.
Buyer's remorse kicks in and buyer can't sleep. 3am go look at photos of house.
Tell a colleague about the house and bring photo up on your phone to show her.
A week later and a couple of issues come up on the inspection. Seller is being difficult. Should we just walk away? Is all of this worth it? Look at photos again.
Just an example. It's very clear to me that the photos most certainly do not just have a single purpose of creating "foot traffic" but serve a much more important process throughout the buying cycle.
That should be clear to anyone in sales but if anyone continues to believe that photos are only for getting foot traffic, perhaps they can explain why traditionally agents would give brochures with photos at viewings? Perhaps this is less popular depending on the market but buyers certainly don't care less about viewing photos after they view the home. They just prefer to look at them online rather than on a brochure. Similar concept.
Of all those complaints, only the "vivid colors" is something that can't be accomplished through simple positioning.
I dabble in RE photography (do the high-end stuff in my area, so about 5~6 a year where the listing agent normally just uses a cell phone ~ I'm just an amateur who likes to play), the camera simply doesn't pick up flaws like the human eye. The perspective issues (distance from road, size of rooms) are 100% due to lens angle. With 26 photos (of a big property, MLS restricted number), would you rather have More in the images you do get, or leave out things but get a better distance perspective? I've never heard of anyone wanting less image, but that's essentially what you're asking for. And again, with the MLS photo restrictions, do you want to waste them on close-ups depicting specific details that may or may not be relevant to Real buyers, or is it better to show more of the property?
My personal take is that I'm not hiding flaws, I simply try to capture the essence of the place. On places with neglected maintenance, the photos easily look better than the real property.... but the photos also show what the property Could look like with only some basic maintenance (usually paint). In shopping for my own home, when I look at photos after seeing the house in person it's EASY to pick out the flaws that I over-looked the first time.
For editing, I do 3~4 main things. Color correction, light balancing, straightening lines (removing that fish-eye feel from wide angle lenses) and the only thing that really Changes much/the only real editing, is I stack images so you can see out windows (just a big blob of white otherwise, more visually appealing to see the green outside).
At some point YOU have to actually go inspect the property. Use the photos as a guide, not an end-all be-all representation. But, in the end, always remember that the Listing Agent is working for the SELLER, and will do what's in Their best interests.
Yes,
The photos singular purpose is to get buyers and agents in the door.
I have to say I 110% agree with you that the listing photos should accurately depict the home. As the person who's hired to market the property, I want to display it in the best possible light. There's certainly a line that some agents cross where they begin (or even sometimes grossly) misrepresent the condition of the home.
This being said, there are some defects that are difficult to show in a photo without zooming in on the defect. Unless a driveway is in really rough shape, they all kind of look the same in photos for example.
This. I’m a home inspector and I have a hard time getting certain drywall defects to show up on a photo. Stuff like nail pops and cracks that are obvious to the naked eye just don’t show up well.
Driveways too. I usually have to take two. One showing it all where I have to point it out and another closeup.
We're in sales.....just like the car companies who photograph on closed roads or desert landscapes where they would tell you NOT to drive the car....we try to position the home in the best light we can. I don't enhance the pictures, changing colors, or virtually inserting furniture, etc....but I do try to clean them up as best as possible and move things around to show it in the very best light we can.
Manipulation of an image in a way that presents anything other than a true representation of the property is a violation of Article 12 of the REALTOR COE. In fact, Standard 12-10 specifically states:
REALTORS®’ obligation to present a true picture in their advertising and representations to the public includes Internet content, images, and the URLs and domain names they use, and prohibits REALTORS® from:
engaging in deceptive or unauthorized framing of real estate brokerage websites;
manipulating (e.g., presenting content developed by others) listing and other content in any way that produces a deceptive or misleading result;
deceptively using metatags, keywords or other devices/methods to direct, drive, or divert Internet traffic; or
presenting content developed by others without either attribution or without permission, or
otherwise misleading consumers, including use of misleading images. (Adopted 1/07, Amended 1/18)
It is also the case that the color temperature of monitors, phones, tablets, etc. are subject to variation so the color or level of detail that appears in an image on the listing agent’s monitor might look very different on a buyer’s monitor or device.
Yes,
The photos singular purpose is to get buyers and agents in the door.
True, however if the photos do not accurately represent the property, the buyers will turn around before they even open the door.
One of the worst examples I have dealt with as a potential buyer didn't even involve any obvious photo shopping. The realty site said the home had been listed for five weeks, but apparently they had used photos taken years ago from a previous listing.
The pictures showed a well groomed lawn, trimmed landscaping and house that appeared to be in generally good condition.
When we arrived at the property (after taking time off of work and driving over an hour in traffic to get there) it was immediately obvious that the home had been empty and uncared for for at least two or three years.
The reality of the current state of the property was faded siding, curling shingles, overgrown shrubbery and a lawn that looked as if it hadn't been mowed in years.
The realtor had met us there and announced that he was having trouble finding the key box because it wasn't where it was supposed to be.
We told him not to bother without even getting out of the car.
Last edited by FatBob96; 05-08-2018 at 03:48 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
