Comments on: Selling houses is a flashback to dating on Match.com

By: Whitney Keyes

Whitney Keyes — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:31:04 +0000

Hi Reba,
I couldn’t agree more! The process of buying houses is a lot like dating! By the way, having a few photos was a great addition to your blog.

I also wanted to suggest a future real estate-related topic for a blog: redesign. I’m the producer and host of a new web TV talk show and we just interviewed a terrific Seattle redesigner, Eduardo Mendoza (www.theenhancedhome.com) on our show. You can see him in action here this week: http://www.WhitneyandWyatt.com. A lot of realtors use services like his to sell homes but more and more homeowners are using it, too. Thanks for a great article! -Whitney Keyes

By: Allen Benson

Allen Benson — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 17:02:40 +0000

I have seen all type of “Helped” photos some weren’t even taken from the property listed. I have seen photos where the agent got on top of the roof to take a “View” shot. As a seller you want your home marketed to get the most bodies through it. As a buyer you may not have chosen to view a home without the use of “Helped” photos. Once you got in the home and found it had many wonderful features that outweighed the “Helped” photos you would be pleasantly surprised. Or you may just hate the house and are mad you got “Helped” into looking at it. Marketing has been all about helped “Helped” photos for years. A real airbrush was used for years prior to software airbrush.

By: Photos, stretching, and dating·Eugene Oregon Real Estate Blog

Photos, stretching, and dating·Eugene Oregon Real Estate Blog — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:33:51 +0000

[...] Reba Haas with Rain City Guide started an interesting threadIt started with a post about photos and ends with a discussion about whether or not the public can trust such photos. [...]

By: Dustin

Dustin — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:17:27 +0000

I once used Photoshop to take out a neighbors house, add a blue sky and eliminate a fire hydrant from the front of the house. I’m probably one of the few around here allowed to admit this because I don’t sell real estate! LOL!

Personally, I don’t see a problem with “stretching” of photos at all, especially if it allows more “room” to fit into a photo. Maybe I’m just jaded, but I never would expect a house to look exactly like it does in the photos… Layouts change… Lighting changes… Although as Matt pointed out the other day, it is possible to overstate a view.

By: Reba Haas

Reba Haas — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 07:36:13 +0000

If you were to actually be in that room you would understand that the room is actually quite large. The initial digital photo doesn’t provide correct scale and also has the potential to mislead the viewer. This photo was done specifically to get all elements of the room included. Don’t take one set of photos as “the rule” on all photos. Other photos in the series of shots used for this one home give excellent representation and unless you’ve been in this house you really can’t say exactly whether or not it is representative or accurate. What the photo does convey is the depth and width of the room that a photo from a less technical camera cannot provide. Also, the main point of the photo is to provide better photos than what is out there traditionally.

By: ARDELL

ARDELL — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 06:35:57 +0000

hh,

There is a lot of confusion among agents on the ethics involved, and not just stretching. Some think they can use “paint” software to eliminate things like wires. I once took out a dumpster, because it WAS going to be gone before the house was sold, but was there at the time it was listed. I just took a new photo after the dumpster left, but I needed a shot in the mls before then.

Sometimes the “stretch” has something to do with a virtual tour. They use “slices” from the virtual tour and all the rooms look kind of convex and concave.

By: hh

hh — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:54:20 +0000

Adding more light is certainly not so misleading. (It could still lead to a feeling of disappointment upon viewing the reality. But then reality is often like that.)

I do wish realtors posting photos on the mls pages would figure out how to do it without stretching them. Maybe this should be on the licensing exam!

By: ARDELL

ARDELL — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:13:55 +0000

hh has a point. I don’t use “lying lenses” though have been urged to do so. But I do ad light as it is easier than bringing in more lamps. I figure the new owner can have more lamps, so that is not a “stretch”. What do you think hh?

By: hh

hh — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 04:30:47 +0000

The better-looking photo also looks like it is very misleading, it appears to have been stretched horizontally. Such stretching and/or use of special “lying lenses” occurs a lot. It leads me to a distrust of realtors.