I found a great article in the Globe and Mail on Friday called "For the real money shot hire a pro." The article talks about the importance of great photography when selling your home, and to make sure you hire someone who is going to make your home look great.
What’s house porn? The new phrase for showing off houses online that some people can’t seem to stop checking out.
They interviewed a number of agents and photographers and discussed the best techniques to make a home look great. The best part are the comments on the Globe and Mail web site, where readers are angered by the fact that a professional photographer might digtitally enhance the photos thereby misleading the public…I’ll get to that at the end of the article.
Here are some of the important points from the article:
- Clients expect a high level of professionalism. It’s got to be as slick as a Lexus commercial.
- The days of lacklustre photos snapped by Realtors may be numbered. Blurry photos of dark rooms, open-lidded toilets and fridge doors littered with kids’ drawings and ladybug magnets just don’t cut it.
- More and more, our clients are picture- rather than word-oriented.
- It’s like a dating service, if there’s no photo, it’s not going to work.
What I found particularily interesting are the techniques photographers are using to make real estate photos look great (not to toot my own horn or anything, but these are the same techniques I use):
- The technical skills of professional photography are light years away from the point-and-shoot approach, you have to be a Photoshop guru.
-
For room interiors, take two exposures from the same location – one to capture the interior details and another that shows the view through a window. Then cut and paste the images for optimal lighting.
-
Another technique is to use a wide-angle lens to make rooms look roomier. Keep the verticals vertical. All vertical lines, such as wall corners, should be shown parallel to the sides of the image, otherwise they distract the viewer’s attention. If the use of a wide-angle lens creates distortion, restore verticals with digital photo-editing.
-
In many cases you have to visit a property a few times, to get the right exposures for the interior and exterior.
The idea is to make prospective buyers envision it as their own home and not just a piece of property.
The article mentions one of our favourite fellow real estate bloggers – Norm Fisher – and his collection of unbelievably bad real estate photography hall of fame. I have put together my own collection and am just working on the final touches before posting it here. I think all our readers will get a good kick out of it.
Digitally Altering Photographs – Where do you draw the line?
I digitally enhance the photographs of our listings. What does that mean? Well, when you walk into a room and look at it you see the entire room, you see out the windows, you see in the corners. When you take a snap shot of a room, the camera only picks up a small portion of the room, and either the image will be dark, or you won’t see out the windows. By using a wide angle lens and digitally enhancing photos I can show more of the room, and I can show the view and the room will look bright – more like what you’d see if you were there in person. Is that misleading? I don’t think so. I think not showing the room as closely as it looks with the naked eye is a disservice to the seller.
I can, and have gone further than that. For example, our clients are selling a new home in St. Albert, the sod hasn’t been laid yet but it is included with the home. An "artistic rendering" similar to what home builders use shows what the buyer is more likely going to get.
The above before and after shots are an example of the digital editing I may do for our listings. Replacing the sky can make the photo stand out, and perhaps catch a buyer’s eye when looking through hundreds of listings. Would I remove or add elements of scenery such as hydro lines or beautiful trees? Of course not. Is the sky included in the sale of the home? No, but the sod is 
The point of all of this? As consumers you have the right to expect expertise when you hire a professional. I hope consumers will soon stop accepting sub-par real estate photography, in the meantime, if you’re thinking of selling, ask to see examples of the agent’s listings and have a look at how they are presented, if you’re not happy with them, hire someone else.
I think this work will bring at least more potential buyers to the home, and certainly is better than having a picture in dark where you cannot see nothing. But you have to remember it’s a really thin line between having more buyers to see the house and getting them disappointed with what the house when they see it and this might backfire badly and people will have hard time to trust that Realtor anymore. It will become like those really aggressive commercials, that people don’t trust anymore even though they might present really good products
Our goal is to accurately represent the property. More along the line of if you were there in person. We recently posted an article about geothermal heating systems and we had more comments about the how the property looks. http://www.millwoodscondo.com (will only work while the property is active). Truly the property is beautiful for a little condo and our job is to capture that essence. So that buyers can see that.
I do believe in digitally enhancing photos to brighten them so you can clearly see the home but….It is misleading to change anything in the pic as in the grass that you added to your pic……that is creating something that is not there even if the owners are going to lay sod……
Is adding the grass that is *soon* to be there any different than all the 3D renderings new home builders use?
Sure, it might be dissapointing if a customer shows up to see the home after viewing that picture and finds that there is no grass, but it’s not like he’s going to sell the home to some sucker that hasn’t seen what he’s getting yet.
I do some 3D renderings for homebuilders on the side of my fulltime job. I definitely put in some *hyper-realism with extra light bloom and specular highlights.
I agree Nate. Builders draw in lush trees and landscaping, and no other houses anywhere to be seen which certainly isn’t what the buyer is going to get. Plus, we do note in the comments that the grass is not there yet but is included.
It seems to me anyway that this has to do with good marketing. After all, the buyer is not stupid. He will come to see before buying. But for him to come, he might need a little help. I also believe that if the gap is too important between the reality and this fiction… he might just leave. In my own experience as an owner, I can testify that a nice apartment but badly maintained will not get rented compared to an average apartment but wonderfully maintained…