Realtors........ please stop Photoshoping houses. (agents, listing, sellers, MLS)

[FatBob96]

From a frustrated buyer:

Please stop Photoshoping online pics of the homes you are representing.

You are alienating and wasting potential clients time by misrepresenting houses.

I cannot tell you how infuriating it is as a buyer to take time to look at a property after seeing it online, only to be greatly disappointed in the reality of the home vs the online, Photoshopped pics.

Do us all a favor and present the property as accurately as possible.

Thanks.

[Diana Holbrook]

We just had another thread, maybe in the other section, about this.

I agree with you, in large part. The photos should accurately depict the property.

Define "photoshopping" for the discussion though, let us know if you are talking about actual flaws that have been edited out... (which is usually a pretty big no-no) or are you talking about HDR processing, that enhances textures and makes the end product look like a video game? Either? Both?

[FatBob96]

Things I have seen that I consider falsely representing a home include homes that look much farther away from the road or other houses than they actually are. Floors, walls and other surfaces that appear pristine but are actually in poor condition.

Cracked driveways that look new online. Roofs, shutters and decks that look much better online than they do in person.

Stretched photos to make rooms look bigger, unnaturally vivid colors etc.

[Copanut]

If you are a Realtor, you are violating your code by doing that. Not so an agent or broker, just lack of integrity.

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by FatBob96

Things I have seen that I consider falsely representing a home include homes that look much farther away from the road or other houses than they actually are. Floors, walls and other surfaces that appear pristine but are actually in poor condition.

Cracked driveways that look new online. Roofs, shutters and decks that look much better online than they do in person.

Stretched photos to make rooms look bigger, unnaturally vivid colors etc.

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.

[Silverfall]

Originally Posted by FatBob96

Things I have seen that I consider falsely representing a home include homes that look much farther away from the road or other houses than they actually are. Floors, walls and other surfaces that appear pristine but are actually in poor condition.

Cracked driveways that look new online. Roofs, shutters and decks that look much better online than they do in person.

Stretched photos to make rooms look bigger, unnaturally vivid colors etc.

So there are overprocessed photos that make the home appear better than it is in person, but some defects just won't show up in photos. Floors and walls, unless you take a closeup of the defects, won't show up.

I actually showed a listing last year where I had to call for an appointment, even though it was vacant, because the agent wanted to make sure everyone knew it looked worse in person. Photos just blend some of that in and there isn't anything agents can do about it.

[Brian_M]

Originally Posted by FatBob96

Things I have seen that I consider falsely representing a home include homes that look much farther away from the road or other houses than they actually are. Floors, walls and other surfaces that appear pristine but are actually in poor condition.

Cracked driveways that look new online. Roofs, shutters and decks that look much better online than they do in person.

Stretched photos to make rooms look bigger, unnaturally vivid colors etc.

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.

[BoBromhal]

other than representing something as a color it is not, or going in and removing faults that appeared in original photos, it doesn't sound like anything wrong happened. the other thread is a good place to read up on this issue.

[geterete]

Basically this is a case of whether you hire a professional photographer or not. You can't ask a professional photographer to take "realistic" photos, because that is a) not what the sellers who hire them want, and b) that is not their job, and is a hindrance to them getting future home shooting gigs. Nobody's going to look at a portfolio full of blah looking, run-down house shots and go "wow, you're hired!"

The "stretched room" thing is because you basically need to shoot rooms with a wide angle lens in order to get most of the room in the shot. The "washed out" look is due to the averaging out of the multiple points of lighting in any given room, and is a sign of a photographer who knows how to handle that challenge expertly. It is usually not photoshopping.

I do understand the frustration, but as a (very) amateur photographer and Realtor, please don't blame photographers or Realtors. They're both just doing their job. I also think a part of our job is to educate buyers on why professionally photographed shots often look better than the actual house, and to keep that fact in mind while looking at pics online. I think most people can tell the difference between a cell phone camera shot and a professional one, so it's not that hard to adjust expectations.

I actually get far more annoyed with bad shots of homes I know look very nice in person. It's frustrating when clients dismiss them due to the pictures, and it's also annoying when realtors don't care enough to make sure the house looks nice & attractive, especially with listings being so hard to come by for most of us.

[Brandon Hoffman]

I photoshop. That's a generic term though. We use it to sharpen the image and enhance colors. Is that what you mean or are you referring to virtual staging?