Home : Blogs : Jeff Turner : Turner's Perspective

How Far Is Too Far With Photo Editing?

Just because you CAN digitally retouch a photo, it doesn't mean you should.

Some digital retouching is obviously overdoing it. I'm a fan of photo retouching in general. Because a great deal of digital photo editing is perfectly appropriate and certainly would not be misleading the consumer. It's a life saver for dark rooms, for example. I received a spam email this week from a company offering digital photo editing for real estate. You may have received one too. The text of the email seemed innocuous enough.

Do you have Real Estate Photos that could have been better if only...?

A car wasn't in the driveway or on the street
Trash cans were not visible or objects on the lawn or signs :)
Camera flash in bathroom mirrors along with photographer
Dark rooms that are poorly lit

All of the things described seem appropriate to me. But the image that was included to illustrate their work caused me to pause. I'm not unfamiliar with high end digital photo editing, so I know what's possible.

The image to the right was the comparison illustration that was included.

Most of the edits were fine, in my opinion. I don't have an issue with the for sale sign being removed. I don't even have an issue with the sky, except for the fact that it looks completely fake. The sky and the for sale sign are not part of the product being advertised. For the same reason, I don't have a problem with Victoria Secret editing the models to make them look better. I know they don't do that with the clothes. In fact, they spend millions each year making sure even the color printed is exactly what you would find on the real product in the store.

In this photo comparison, some things do bother me a bit. The stains on the driveway are not there. That's part of the product, in my opinion. Less offensive, but still raising an eyebrow is the fact that the mailbox has been removed, and so has the telephone/electric pole behind the house. Maybe I'm being picky. Maybe. I've seen more heinous examples of photo manipulaton than this one. This is quite tame in many ways. It was obviously sent to thousands of real estate professionals, so this company must not see any issue at all.

But it made me pause and wonder: Where is the line?

I know where I would draw the line, but I didn't know where others might. So, I forwarded the email to several real estate pros I respect and the response was mixed. So i thought I'd see what the AR community had to say about this specific example and on the subject in general.

How far is too far when it comes to real estate photography?

8/17/06 Update: “Remember, if a consumer claims they relied on a representation as real and true, and it turns out to be an enhancement and false, the licensee will have to defend the action. Why would anyone wish to incur this risk?”

Posted by Jeff Turner on 06/16/2007 07:49 PM

Comments (149)

photos, photo retouching, ethics, project blogger, jeff turner

Originally posted at: Turner's Perspective: How Far Is Too Far With Photo Editing?

Post is included in group: The Hubba Clubba...ROAR!

149 Comments on How Far Is Too Far With Photo Editing?

JUN

2007

I'm not an admirer of photo editing for the MLS or to display homes for sale. Granted it helps to have the light and if the sun isn't right, digitals can be lightened, but I don't believe in enhancement to improve the image to a distorted image.

Adding clouds??? Why???

Got me on that one, Lenn. I have no idea. :)

I would never edit to this extent with a listing. I do try to take flattering pictures, but they are REAL. If you go to one of my listings, you will not be disappointed because it's not what you expected. I don't even alter the sky or grass to make them look better, although I will brighten and crop as needed.

That Show I sent you today? The first pic was taken through a fence, and I took the fence out. I love making "my" pictures better, but I won't bait and switch a buyer.

I sometimes make the sky bluer and the grass a bit greener than it really is. Clients are so funny - they are like wow, our lawn looks great. I don't tell them. I have even gone so far as to fix a brown patch in the grass. Usually after staging the lawn has been re-seeded anyway. I have often wondered about this exact same thing myself. I think taking out electrical wiring is a big one. I'm not a realtor so I am not trying to sell the property - I wondered if there is some type of guideline for realtors or code of ethics when it comes to photo editing. Can't wait to read the opinions on this one.

Seems out of line. I agree with Sarah. I would consider the editing to be a misrepresentation and personally I would never compromise my professionalism to make a sale.

The other thing is that the sky looks fake to you an me because we know the powers of photoshop. I think most people will look at that and not even question the unusual sky. I would probably have bumped up the grass if I was going that far with that photo.

I thought that the sample was worse than what a good touch up would be - I would never take out a material fact of the property - but - sometimes when lightening the grass will fade - or it has not turned green just yet I will give it a boost - but only if it makes it look true to what is there and will be there when one visits the property.

My thoughts:

Perfectly OK: Adjust contrast/brightness, sharpen. Straighten tilting vertical or horizontal line. Crop for better angle or to remove trash cans or car.

Maybe, but probably OK: Color corrections to grass or sky. Cloning out trash cans or car. Adding clouds to sky.

Definite No-No: Cloning out power wires (their presence or absence could be a disclosure issue). Cloning out system components such as a water heater or furnace. Making changes to the structural appearance in any way.

I wonder how long before some of the great stagers - such as Maureen Henry or Craig Schiller or any of the others here - will branch out into virtual staging. Agent emails Maureen a photo of an empty room. Maureen photoshops in furniture and decor, emails it back to the agent, agent posts it in MLS. Maureen never physically places anything in the empty room. Hmmm.

Jeff, ALL of your posts have such value. I am just having a hard time implementing everything, Jott, Vitalist, Google Earth 3D yikes. Thanks so much for taking time to share so much with us!

Good point Jeff. I think any physical changes to the property or surroundings are wrong. Brighten the photos make the colors look good but leave the stains in the driveway and certainly leave the power poles. heck they are going to see them when they get there and it will be a let down if the photos have been too enhanced. I'd rather the house look better than the photos.

I have no qualm with editing out garbage cans or part of a car that I had no control over being partially in my pictures. I also don't see a problem with lightening a pic when it was taken on a cloudy day or in a darkened room.

I have a big problem if people remove a high voltage power line or something else permanent!

There's a lot of gray area in this one. Whatever it is that's done needs to not compromise the true look of the home.

I have edited out my sign but that's about it. I also tend to go back and retake pictures if I don't like the results.

P.S. I just noticed that they cloned out the mailbox, too. That's not good. A home needs a mailbox. :-)

Jeff, we seem to be pretty much in agreement. I do lighten photos. I take out garbage cans, cars, signs - things that are not part of the house.

In our older neighborhoods most of our luxury homes DO have electric wires going along the street (only the newer ones have underground electric). Though they stand out "like a sore thumb" I don't succumb to the temptation to remove them for a better photo. They're there, so they stay!

Virtual staging was interesting!

I have, on occasion, inside the home (i.e., they see the reality, they're not enticed to see the home), had a photo that shows how the house would look with a paver driveway instead of an asphalt driveway, but I clearly say - this is how the house COULD look!

Oh, I just wish I knew how to edit out trash cans and cars! My next learning project. I do lighten, but never distort. The bottom photo looks like a photo taken from a builder's pamphlet (an artists rendition) I dislike seeing the builder's artist rendition on a home which is 2-3 years old, but have seen agents use that picture for the MLS.

This post yelled out to me, 'Feature Me, Feature Me!' This is a very vital message that needs to be shared. Great points, Jeff. Thanks!

I don't think WE should be removing neighborhood "assets" by fudging on listing photos. Naughty naughty...

Agreed. I will lighten/brighten, crop, straighten, resize. Occassionally I have taken a car out of the driveway, or a garden hose out of the lawn. But those pics look more like a CAD rendition of a home. Natural is good. Anything that has to do with the physical structure of the house should not be removed - just take a pic from a different angle instead!

Jeff, I agree with everything along the same lines as you on this. Getting rid of the for sale sign is a good edit. Getting rid of the telephone pole and stains on the driveway is not. It's lying. The sign will come out when the house is sold. The pole and stains won't. It's misleading and should not be done. Even the clouds don't bother me. Those change every day. But when things are removed to mislead the public, I have a problem with that.

A question to Rich, how do I teach my posts to scream out like that? =)

Changing the house I think is totally wrong. When I sold real estate, cameras were only film so the item was never an issue.

David Kosmecki - AmStar Mortgage

http ://www.americanstar.com

There's nothing wrong with showing property in the best light with the best equipment. There's everything wrong with editing out (or in) a part of what's being advertised for sale.

You know what clients are always saying about photos we take? "WOW, you guys sure are good with a camera...HA HA." Meaning they know what they see in a magazine or newspaper, is rarely what they will REALLY see when they get out of the car. IF they get out.

Great points Jeff, I could not agree more on this! I think over retouching is almost bait and switch......it's one thing to shoot the shot at the best angle, or get rid of the for sale sign......or even touch up the sky....but there is a line you should not cross, in my opinion.

I sure would like to figure out how to make my photos brighter, just haven't figured them out yet. Funny, my cheap $79 digital camera takes brighter photos than my $1500 SLR. go figure!

Jeff,

I used to do tours with VHT and on a few of them it was cloudy and they were able to enhance the photos kust like your example with the clouds and to tell you the truth no one can tell..it is a great enhancement to use on pictures.

I d still on my own camera ..it is pretty good 6X mega pixels with a 10X optical zoom..takes excellent pictures. Thanks for the compliment on my Meez. I actually got mine after seeing yours.

Agents should never try to take 100 pounds off of a house. I'll brighten up, sharpen, straighten and crop but that's about it -- the physical house must accept itself and remain as it is. Seeing some of the edits does make me want to play a little with Photoshop, though!

I agree with Cheryl above exactly, I was going to say just that, then read the posts and saw hers...everyone pretty much agrees it seems. I do this all the time with photos but never knew if there were guidelines or not. If there are, it would be good to know in advance before taking it that step too far. I would think that taking something out that would still be there for the new homeowner would be taboo though. Like those power lines... seriously, people expect there to be power lines by houses anyway so to take it out to make the picture look nicer, kind of pointless anyway if you ask me.

I've actually retouched photo's to the point that every item in the room is updated with something more cool... but then those were for fun...LOL ...not for a customer. Being that you truly can change every aspect you want to, you would think there would be guidelines. So I would think if it is cosmetic and wouldn't change the mind of the buyer "in person" anyway, it should be ok. If it's to purposely hide an eyesore you know would make a difference, then you should know the answer to that without asking.

I agree with some of the comments regarding altering the look and real condition of the house, but I do think as you mentioned this is a great tool for removing items like trash cans and etc.....

Great post, I consistently manipulate photos to remove unsightly things, green up the grass ect. One thing I do which I will admit is borderline is taking someone else's house out of the picture (on the small lots). I don't feel there is anything wrong with modifying the image of the home as long as it does not materially represent something that is false. Ultimately, we are ADVERTISING the product, the product is the home. We don't cry about the coke bottles not having dew on them when we get them either. So welcome to 2000 marketing.

Thank you for posting it :)

I'm with you...enough is enough! Why mislead the clients...what we write as copy is padded enough at times just to get you in the house!

PS...I would love to see what you have to say about these photos of some of the agents out there. COME ON...how many "gorgeous pictures" have you seen that actually match the agent's profile? Another glorious opportunity to EDIT THE PHOTO as needed!

I think the sky/clouds look fake too. For a moment, I thought it was an artist's rendition. Then I looked closer. I think that removing the telephone pole and driveway stains. Is wrong. I think it blatantly hides defects (or perceived defects) of the property. That's like going to buy a couch, and the cushion with the big stain on it was flipped over. The mailbox- eh, I don't really think that is a big issue. But why did it need to disappear? I understand removing the for sale sign. It keeps the photo neutral.

I dont understand why someone would go out of their way to remove the stains, the telephone pole, and whatever else wsa behind the house. People go look at houses before buying. If they have this prefect image in their head and it turns out to be a cardboard box, they aren't going to be happy. Those clouds are just horrible!

I would not remove anything permanent (poles, mailboxes, etc). I know how to take a flattering photo (and that's not always easy), so I enhance for lighting but that's about it.

I think photos of homes for sale should be just that.. photos.. not pretend art work... Just my thoughts..

I do not have photo shop yet. As a result, my photo editing is limited to the minimal, straighten, brighten,lighten, etc.

This to me seems perfectly acceptable, especially here on the rainy west coast where there may not be sun for weeks.

I also think it is just fine to remove objects that one may have forgotten or could not remove. (cars, recycling bins etc)

I do think it is completely inappropriate to alter the phone lines, trees, stains etc. It is wrong and completely misleading!

Tough question, Jeff. I have edited cars out, signs out. My husband has even made the grass greener. I don't think it is dishonest, just trying to show the house in it's best light.

I think everything in this business needs to be verified, so I don't think the photo doctoring is a huge deal. Now if the buyer never sees the home in person and relies on the photos, I think the listing agent is going to have a serious problem.

Cheryl - thanks for the new business venture idea. I may never even need to leave my home. ;)

Another thing I always edit out in photoshop is myself reflected in the bathroom mirror. Sometimes the bath is small and there is no available angle to take the shot where I am not in it. I clone a little piece of the reflection without me in it and I'm good to go. That one really comes in handy.

Jeff, doctoring photos is no,no. Never make the grass greener, remove any item from the surrounding structure or doctor what is considered part of the house and land. I have only cropped but never touched up and would never do that. It can open up quite a liability. Just take the picture correctly, ask the seller to remove the car and take at different angles.

But I must say, I do enjoy playing with photos for my blog, though.

TOTALLY agree with Gena!

Maybe so, but it's all about the marketing of a property. There are some great tools out there to enhance listings.

I've actually finished walls without drywall as not to show the exposed studs and concrete block - knowing that the walls would be finished shortly thereafter. I do agree that we have to be very carefull about the types of enhancements done to these pictures because they need to portray the product. Thanks for taking us to that link of the beauty enhancements - my favorite was this one.

Did you watch this? Back in skinny jeans.

Oh! and HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!!

Tracy--it can also be about LAWSUITS! This is a sue-happy country!

Opps--that was me above...forgot to login

Maureen - that's pretty amazing.....that's what I call false advertisement! : )

Jeff, this is exactly why Realtors Code of Ethics requires us to "paint a true picture" in advertising. It's one the to sharpen a photo, but I've seen tiny homes stretched and high tension wires removed.

So for the ones who think it's fine to edit all, how far is too far? What if a house is an ugly color, would you change the color of the house in the picture? If it has broken eaves and shutters, replace with new ones in the image? Because you can, and it's marketing.... good question about "how far is too far?"

Our job is to entice not to deceive. I don't add or remove anything from my photos that would have the slightest chance of being considered duplicitous. I don't want to waste my seller's time, nor that of a home buyer either.

I'm of the mind that you can take out movable objects such as cars and garbage cans but you should

never remove power lines or stains. Cropping, contrast and brightness are certainly acceptable but let's be real.

Ohh my gosh.... the mail box disappear... !! so did some trees....

Too much if you ask me...

It's too much when you're deliberately trying to misguide someone...false advertising I think it's called....

I'm torn on this photo. This is because the only things done as far as I saw were that the weather and lighting were changed as well as the mail box and the sign removed. In my opinion, this wasn't a deceptive change. If you repaired the roof, and siding with photo touch ups, I clearly think that this is wrong. I try to just take the best shots possible with a home and let the chips fall where they may. I really don't think that the photos should be retouched.

I dont think photos should be editted.

Take decent photos with decent lighting. If it is a nasty day, come back when it is sunny.

Leave the bad pics out.....means no pics with flash in bathroom mirror and the photographer

Totally agree with Cheryl Johnson's comment... AND... interesting idea on virtual staging.

Removing the mail box and telephone/electric poles is just ridiculous.

Great links Jeff. THANKS!

I believe in showing and exposing our properties in the best possible way but enhancing photos that make the property look better than it actually is only dissapoints the buyers when they get there. Sometimes our marketing is better than our product but it won't sell it. Honesty is the best policy.

But I think it's perfectly fine for REALTOR® boggers who are up til 3 am to air brush off the dark circles under their eyes ;-)

JUN

2007

I made some flyers for a FSBO once..... and the pics provided to me were from 'trash day'.... LOL

I edited out the trash carts, and then went ahead and filled in a couple of bare spots from the lawn.....

Should I have removed the trash? Well, I am cool with that. Should I have added some landscape? Well, I thought about it later and figured that maybe I got a little too 'happy' with the clone stamp tool...... but noone got mad.

hmmm

Jeff: The comparison reminds me of photos that Real Estate agents have on their cards. I noticed right away that the electrical wiring, etc. in the back wasn't showing, and since that could possibly bother one of my buyers, I would rather have them see it first and make a determination. Otherwise, perhaps a wasted trip, and one of those "Is that the same house?" Just like on a business card, "Is that you?" Like many others, I like the ability to "fix" photos; however, I typically do not on a listing. I take the photos myself, and they are the real thing!

Perhaps a crop here or there. Certainly making it as clear as is possible. But I think doctoring is a no-no.

Jeff,

You're right about the lawsuit. It seems that with real estate, there is no law until there is a lawsuit. I dont have time to mess with photoshop so I do a few things when I take outside photos of the property. I do it the day after the lawn is mowed. We water down the driveway, remove trash cans from the front of the home and take about 20 photos of the front of the house from all angles. Guaranteed that one or two will stand out and make the house look 10 tens better. Photos of the inside are also planned and we take multiple photos as well. Lately, I purchased a digital camera with a wide angle lens built in. That camera takes awesome awesome pictures!

Likely taking away the power lines and other things that actually distort the image of what the property is really like is a bit over the line. but removing garbage cans that were left out on the day a photo was scheduled and such are likely just fine.

just my 2 cents.

I think it looks more like an artist rendering than a photo. I brighten up pictures if it is an overcast day and crop the photo to get the best angles and views. I never remove things that are obviously there. That is over the line as least in my book.

Very unethical work when you try 1to deceive people about material things that affect the home. Grease stained driveway, much less power lines are big, big issues.

Where I could see using the power of Photoshop would be in Virtual Staging. Jeff, maybe that is something that you could develop next - a blue screen type thing and furniture, plants that could be rotated onto the rooms. You could have different modules with various styles of furniture - modern, Pottery Barn, shaddy chic, traditional. I can see there would be a big market for this with empty homes. You could put in a disclaimer - Virtual Staged!

I have actually started getting compliments at Open Houses saying "Wow! It looks just like the photos. Thanks!" I couldn't believe things had gotten that bad. But they were referring to wide angle lenses that make the rooms look bigger than they really are, not photo editing.

If it is going to go away at closing, like a car, yes you could take it out. If it is going to stay like wires or a hydrant, then no, it comes with the house and stays in the photo.

Jeff,

Hmmm believe it our not I am mixed on this one. Just LOOK at how car companies manipulate images of their products to hight light and focus attention on them.

So in some ways I am not bothered by the clouds (althought I actuallyin in this case find them distracting) and the removal of the telephone pole. Because believe it or not I think they are on ov those things that "disappear" because they are so common. Kind of like a light switch on a wall.

HOWEVER, the driveway stains... THAT is a part of the house. The seller is buying them too so I think people might feel manipulated a bit. If they notice.

As I write this I think of Glamor Shots... if wive and girfriends can do it. WHY not homesellers?

i think that most agents use photo editing responsibly, and a lot of photos we see on MLS do not get the photo editing they need - like responsible cropping. I don't have any problem with the edited photo in your blog. If it brings me to the property to see it in real life (no editing possible there!), then I'm doing my job as the listing agent.

Jeff - great post and it's been interesting reading all the comments on what one feels is okay to do and not okay. Most seem to agree with you, as do I. I don't have the skills to do start removing and adding things to pictures, but I do use Picassa to brighten, crop and straighten pictures. I love being able to do those kinds of thing to my picures - they really need it most times! ;-)

What's the deal with that comment from Mott with those agents he's promoting? This is the 4th post this morning where I've seen he's done that in the comments section on someone else's post. Not NICE!

Happy Father's Day Jeff!
Ann

Marie Kletke is right on the money.

I have fairly decent Photoshop skills ... but the truth is it only takes a couple minutes to walk up to the trash can, pull it out of the way, shoot some photos, then pull the can back where it was.

Even on my best days, it takes longer than that to clone out the same trash can.

Oohhh... I like the idea of Jeff developing Virtual Staging Software. :-)

Jeff another thought provoking post thanks for sharing.

Jeff - I agree totally that editing to that point can teeter on deception..... luckily for me the agent in my area - 95% anyway don't have a clue how to do such a thing .... Thanks once again for sharing and have a great Father's Day!! - But we know you won't be reading this till Monday??!! RIGHT

Cheryl - it's funny you say that about moving the trash can. Just recently I went to photograph a property and it was 95 degrees outside, I was wearing heels and it seemed so much easier to Photoshop the trashcan away than to move it. And then inside the refrigerator must have had 1,000 magnets. I decided to shoot the kitchen as is and then shop the magnets digitally, and I did the same with the trash can. I think it has to do with each particular circumstance and how much time you have available to move stuff.

Ines: I stopped wearing heels about 1989, I think. Too many vacant hillside lots to tromp across, too many rickety pull down ladders into debris strewn attics, too many trash cans to drag out of view. Hey, this is a working class 'hood. :-) You get the idea. Once the shoes went, the rest of the uniform followed.

(Sorry, to take your post off on a tangent, Jeff <s>)

Probably someday there will be photo editing detection software within Realtor.com et al so they can watch-dog this situation?

Sandra you could be on to something there! Virtual staged for online images to show the various ways a room can be used so long as there's a disclaimer saying it is being done to an empty room... I like it!

Great posers Jeff! With so many people starting on the net and self directing their searches on the internet, great pictures are not a plus, they are a must. This definitely has some "truth in advertising" issues. The main focal point for me was the sky so I didn't notice the missing mailbox, sign and electric line but as you pointed out, those are major things!

I don't think the home itself should be changed. Adding a little light bacaues on an overcast day is probably fine. I think we should also remember that the buyers typically come to the home to actually take a look at it prior to buying.

My guideline is ENHANCE, not CHANGE. I will brighten pictures and remove flashes (or remove me from the bathroom mirror) or remove the For Sale sign (We cannot have the For Sale sign in our MLS.) But these are things that are not a part of the actual property. They are MY errors/blemishes and do not transfer to the new owner, like driveway stains and telephone poles do.

If it is a cloudy day ... I take another picture on a SUNNY day.

Happy Father's Day, Jeff!

I agree with lots of you on this maybe lighten up the image to enhance the quality but lets not change it so we are taking away telephone poles that are actually there is plain site. That is deceptive.

I think there is a vast difference between artfully TAKING a photo and editing a photo to obscure "material facts" related to the property.

If you show no driveway stains, no utility poles and what-have-you, you are warranting these issues and commemorating them in whatever form of advertising is used (web or print).

Hope the E&O is all paid up and you are ready to defend the false advertising (whomever is doing this type of thing).

JUN

2007

Jeff,

I would hate to have a client drive to my County from your County because they saw a retouched picture of a home and decided it was their dream home, only to find that it was just that, a dream home.

It's a long drive to Northern California from Southern California. If a client is going to make the trip, I'd like them to see the home that they saw in the photo.

That's a good incentive to take good photos.

Fran

Fran: I have actually asked my clients if they want me to go take more photos of a listing they saw online (before they drive up to the foothills) and the neighborhood, etc., so as not to have them waste their time. BECAUSE, they KNOW we REALTORS can take/make some pretty NICE pictures.

All... the only problem with taking Sunday's off is that I can't respond to posts if I put them up on Saturday. :) There is no way I can comment on all 84 of these comments.

I see there is some general agreement, but there are a few who feel it's OK to make the grass greener, etc. I can tell you all this, I ran one of the largest digital retouching companies in the US. I know that some of my team could have made that home look much better than this company did... in their sleep. This is a horrid example of photo retouching, in my opinion. But it does illustrate the ethical dangers involved. If you're the agent who turned the photo over to this company, are you pleased? I would hope not.

OK... now let's talk about reality. Is is easier to retouch a photo to remove a trash can or to just move the trash cans? As Cheryl and others have said, it's WAY EASIER to just MOVE THE TRASH CAN!

So... let's take this one step further. Here is another example from their website. This edit is not to the property itself. My opinion? It's wrong. What's yours?

street unrepaired street repaired

Jeff, I am not a big fan of "editing" the pics. The one directly above is actually offensive to me. To me, it's pretty much lying. I agree, there is some photo editing that can be done with changing the product you are buying, but that is a fine line to ask a bunch of realtors to walk. However, its pretty much impossible to keep track. I think the truth is that those who take it too far will eventually see it in the kinds of clients they get stuck working with.

It's gives a false impression - definitely wrong. I would take a picture with less street and more sky, but would not retouch the street. (PS, it looks like one of your kids went to town with Paint, on the first shot) : )

Jeff, I am gonna disagree on that last one. I agree removing PHYSICAL items such as power lines or poles is not right. But to doctor up a photo by making the grass greener or the road more attractive is not far out of whack. Next week that road can be paved, the grass can burn out or blossom greener. But the Power lines will most likely always be there AND that is usually why someone won't buy a house. Never have I heard that "OH the tar marks in the road look horrible or the grass isn't green". But yes, some buyers don't like water towers, junk yards as next door neighbors and most definitely Power Lines.

Cheryl, GMA had a blurb on Photo staging last year. They would put furniture in picture of empty rooms to make photos show better. I can't remember the company they highlighted (it might be these guys) but they talked about removing unsightly views out of the windows too. That's just not right.

If there is a permanent fixture, you can't remove it and expect to be ethical in what you are marketing...that's my two cents. It is so much easier if you take the photos from the right angle with the right lighting and the unsitely objects are not there. But sometimes, the tools that we have available to give us an edge should be used. I think that is a disservice to your seller, if you don't.

Bob, my sister said the same thing when she saw it. I can respect your point of view on that one. It's a gray area. I think it's misleading, personally, unless you KNOW the street is going to be paved the next day. But if that's the case, just retake the photo. It will be interesting to see how others see it.

Jeff, It really comes down to taking the right photo from the beginning. But sometimes you don't realize you didn't have the right angle and cropping the road was not feasible.

Bob... that's where the rubber meets the road. In this digital world you know instantly whether you got the right angle. You just need to preview. So, I agree, it comes down to taking the right photo from the beginning.

Great Post Jeff, I agree with the majority, no removal of anything that is part of the house or the view. Color changes and removal of cars is OK in my book. You could make the lawn green if you wanted to get some water on it, so I don't see harm in presenting the home at its best.

I wrote about this last week as well: http://activerain.com/blogsview/122873/Ethics-and-Digital-Photography

Joshua, thank you. Never hesitate to go ahead and put a direct link out from my blog posts. I don't mind a bit. Let me help people find yours a bit easier by doing so below.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/122873/Ethics-and-Digital-Photography

Jeff I agree with you that "fixing" the road is just another kind of untruth. No way would I do it. It's unsightly now and to make it look fixed when it isn't is just not right....

Mary... "another kind of untruth" is very well put. Again though, I think it is gray, since it's not the house.

Another great post Jeff.

My feeling is you should edit the photos to show the house in it's best possible light. That means staging, effort, and attention to detail in the editing.

However once you start presentiting the house as better than it is, then I think you start running into slippery ground.

Personally the second photo just looks false and it's a bit of a turn off.

Athol

Okay Ding! Ding! Time to chime in ... When you are selling a home you are selling a lifestyle. That lifestyle INCLUDES the grass, driveway, street, hedges, power-lines as much as it includes the beds, baths and floor plan.

My opinion is NOT to mess with anything other than camera-operators errors, like flashes and for sale signs. Anything else seems to be a blatant misrepresentation of the property. It only pisses buyers and buyer agents off.

If it is something like a trash can or a vehicle - something that will not "go with the house" then ask the owners to move it. I do this all the time and when I explain the importance of good pictures, they happily oblige.

If you cannot seem to take a good picture, consider having someone take them for you. I know that there is a virtual tour company in my city who actually makes more money taking pictures for agents for their MLS and advertising than doing VT's.

"When you are selling a home you are selling a lifestyle."

Yeah... my thoughts exactly.

OK... let's take this into an area that some have said is acceptable. Making the grass greener. Here is another example from their website. In this case, the brown grass is not the result of lightening the image. The grass appears to be dead in the original image. Certainly, if the new owners work at it, the grass can indeed be green again. Is this another gray area?

brown grass green grass

Ooh! Not everywhere ... We are (right this very moment) working with a listing agent because the grass has started to die between the time we made the offer and now. The sellers are responsible for making the grass like the picture in the MLS is. (Our buyers are out of state and are buying the home based 100% on pictures.) In Colorado, it is nearly impossible to revive grass once it starts dying - it will need to be re-sodded if the Lawn Doctor cant fix it.... at the Seller's expense.

Making the grass greener could be a potential liability to your seller down the road.

Jeff - that one is not making the grass a little greener. That's virtual sod. ;)

Here is one of a back yard that I edited for demonstration purposes. I bumped up the green and deepened the blue in the sky. Actually I tried to make the yard look the way I'm seeing it. Sometimes the pictures look washed out - I just give them a little life. I don't see a problem with that. But I so see that it is a slippery slope. How far it too far? And who decides?

*Keep in mind I'm not a realtor and not actually selling anything.

I don't see anything wrong with punching up a little colour in the grass or the sky....the picture of the grass makes it look a little ambiguous anyhow...is it the the bad pic?.....is it really brown??? If I was a prospective buyer, I would honestly think that pic from MLS was just a little washed out.

But, I don't think you should "create" or "remove" what's there or not there in terms of architechtural features or fixed features.

By the way, I did a little photo editing with my profile pic.....

I'm really 95. Don't I look mahhhhhhhhvelous? :)

Mariana... great story. It certainly illustrates the dangers.

Maureen... your example is not over the line, in my opinion, but you're right. It's a slippery slope. Very slipper.

Julia... I've edited my profile photo as well. And I'm not joking. I removed the bags from my eyes. I didn't sleep much back then. (Not a lot different now) I'd show you the original, but then I'd have to kill you. :) That was also taken about 5 years ago. I've got a few more wrinkles now at 45 than I did at 40. I should probably have another one done.

Maureen... Here's another example of stepping over the line with the grass thing, in my opinion. Again, this is from the same company's sample pages. In this one they said: "Add Blue Sky, Take Out Cars, Prune Trees." They don't even mention the fixed dead grass spots. And how do they know what is behind the cars?

original unfixed fixed original

JUN

2007

that tree pruning is horrendous! They better get a certified arborist next time!

Ines... at the risk of beating this into the ground, this is obviously deception, in my opinion. I've been searching for some definitive "rules" from an MLS on this, but can't find them. If anyone knows if there are any specific to photos, please let me know. In my search, I did come across this jewel of a series, however. Athol Kay's Seven Rules For Taking Good Real Estate Photos

Yes. I love Athol's photo series...

Mariana... I'm certainly glad I found it.

Jeff - I think it's up to each agent's discretion and hopefully we will all be smart about it. In the world of sales, there are tons of techniques, some I consider less ethical than others, but there is a fine subjective line. You have made us think of the consequences and that's what's important. Another lesson from Turner Tool Boy!

Ines... Yes, each agent has to weigh their specific circumstance. Each home, photo, context is going to present its own set of unique potential challenges. I think there are some hard lines that clearly shouldn't be crossed, but there is great deal of gray area as well.

JUN

2007

minor editing OK, anything else is TOO much and not really ethical (in my opinion)! Nice changes to Real Estate shows by the way. I really like the community shows feature.

Thanks, Katrina!

Bottom line in my opinion? Have a picture of "yourself" taken within two years and don't have it glamorized or touched up. As for real estate photos? Take them yourself and make sure the garbage cans, cars, cracked streets, etc. are not in your photo. If the grass isn't green, then I don't green it up. BUT when it is green again, I retake the photo. Same with the sky. I just take them at different parts of the day. I typically take no less than 35 photos of any given listing. Then I go back and retake if I don't like how they turn out. Good discussion.

Teri... well, then. I need a new photo. :)

What I enjoy about Jeff's postings is the wide range of comments and discussion that he always creates (instigates?) I like Cheryl's guidelines. I find myself thinking that if something could change (for better or worse) during the listing period (snow melts, grass grows, etc), then it may be reasonable to show the house in the most favorable light. Certainly we have seen edits that suggest the photoshop operator should be required to have a contractors license. It is interesting that the group would not clean up the street digitally, but would not hesitate to crop the photo so that the street did not show suggesting that not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as telling the truth.

Part of the defense is that the ultimate consumer will personally visit the property before purchase so that they cannot claim to have relied upon the MLS photo or brochure. Mariana opens a whole new dimension as she describes homes that are being purchased on the internet without a personal visit.

The concern, of course is that our positioning the property for sale could be viewed as fraud or as an unfair or deceptive trade practice. Perhaps our best defense is the old reliable... Disclosure. Perhaps when a prospect indicates an intent to submit an offer we should take a new set of photos showing the state of the property (with no retouching or editing) immediately before the offer and have the buyer sign off on the printed sheets.

There has always been a tension between sales talk (puffing) and the reality of the product. Bryant is correct that we could lose a sales opportunity if the house doesn't meet the expectations created by the photo (or Jeff's great shows - I keep listening for the music when I visit the homes). The consumer is entitled to all relevant information to base their buying decision - but we have to get them to come and look at the house.

As with most of the more interesting questions here, we may not have the final answers (particularly where the laws and judicial interpretations may vary from state to state), but it useful for us to gain a better understanding of the questions in these forums.

Jeff, I didn't mean "you," particularly. Just as professionals. As for your photo? Well? Hmmmmmmm, really don't know since it is so, shall I say, "unique?"

JUN

2007

Jeff - Check out this one - Sometimes photo editing is a must. Photo Editing: Before and After

LOL! I'll shout out a hearty amen to that one. :) I left a comment there as well. The deletion was appropriate, of course, though I think the lightening actually hurt the photo.

Thought you'd get a kick out of that one. I didn't like the lightening either.

Jeff & Maureen, I just wanted to clarify something. At the time I published that post I was using a computer monitor that needed to be replaced because from one day to the next the colors & brightness on it were "off" and I did the best I could at the time to edit it. Obviously, at the time it did not look too light on my screen, but when I saw it a few days later after getting my new monitor, I realized it was not my best work. As you can see by the dates on the comments, I only received one more comment two weeks later, and then four in the past 4 days (3 of them since Maureen put the link in your comments here). So... re-doing the photo editing wasn't exactly a high priority for me. Though I couldn't see it at the time due to my crappy monitor, I agree... the lightening was too much.

BTW, looking at the two photos on your post here, I do think they went overboard on the photo editing. Surprisingly, the didn't completely get rid of the telephone/electric pole behind the house (that would've been completely deceitful), but the editing sure made it sort of fade away so that it's not as obvious and even somewhat hard to tell what exactly it is.

Leanne - I have that problem all the time. What looks good on one monior does not look good on my laptop. Then when I think I'm done and I go to print the pics for my portfolio they are way too dark once printed. It is hard to get things right.

Jeff

You asked for our opinion and here is mine. I really believe it when we say to the client be it buyer or seller that we will be totally honest with them. I think some retouching is fine. Like you said, garbage cans that you know are only out on trash days may be removed, or the for sale sign, however when you change the appearance of the house or the driveway or anything else that will be apparent when the buyer arrives to view the house is way off base. To me it smacks of bait and switch. So it isn't the prettiest house on the block, but so what? The buyer will see that in the end anyway so might as well be up front about it from the beginning.

Good post Jeff as always. Thanks :)

Maureen, that's why I try to do all my photo editing on my desktop, but there are times when the laptop is more convenient because I can use it upstairs or downstairs. There's something about laptop screens that makes photos look somewhat different.

Good tips....thanks

Very interesting reading, Thanks all.

Editing a photograph, especially in my business as inspector could get me into trouble. I never edit. I just make certain that I tell the truth. whether it is dark, improper exposure or what ever the case may be. I do not edit the photographs I take but I certainly do put small amount of comments inside the photographs that appear in my reports. Pointing out the exact problem.

I think editing, like when you pick up a magazine, is not showing you the real thing.

JUN

2007

Leanne... your post was an excellent example of why you should edit sometimes!

Maureen... color matching is a science. Even the best struggle with it.

Roberta... thank you for chiming in.

Larry, Mitchell.. thank you.

Thomas... thank you for your inspector's perspective. I appreciate it.

About all I do to photos is:

Correct the levels and white balance. This simply fixes my lame ass photography skills. Presents the room or the home in a more natural light.
I will remove cars from driveways, trash cans, water hoses, extension cords, etc.
I'll generally leave the sky as it is, even though most times in WA it's gray, grey, or some shade of full cloud cover.
In my first year as an agent, I do admit that I did remove a power line or two. But I won't any longer as it does accurately represent the home.
I have occasionally "greened" up a yard or two.

Here is an example I did for one of my listings and used it to show others in my office what is possible with Photoshop (I used to work for Adobe, so I may be at a slight advantage)

http://trekkin.com/beforeafter.html

In this photo I:

Removed the debris (bbq's, etc) from the left side of the door.
Removed the garbage cans from the left side of the garage
"Fixed" the broken window downstairs (This was to be done shortly after the home went on the market, so I felt it was still an accurate representation of the home)
Removed the dangling electrical cord by the garage
Notice the power lines are still in the photo and that would have been an UBER easy fix.
The sky is still that shade of full cloud cover.

Did I go too far? I don't think so. Your comments? I also left the photos full size so you could see any editing blunders I may have made. At 400 px wide as is typical on the MLS, they would be barely visible.

John... No. I don't think you went to far either, based on your explanation. The only "questionable" thing in my mind is the window, but if it was truly fixed a few days later, then it's not deceptive, in my opinion. But it all begs this question: Why not just move the electrical cord, the bbq, garbage cans and wait to take the photo when the window was fixed and the sky was blue. :)

I personally wouldn't have gone this far, but I wouldn't be overly concerned about it either.

Wow, what a difference! I would want to live somewhere where the sky always looked like that. :) I just wanted to introduce myself, I read a lot of your blogs and find them very interesting. My name is Danielle and I work for The Moore Team. Thanks for the great posts!

John - Wow - you are a real Photoshop pro. You should post your comment as a blog in the photography group.

OK I would not actually do it but I think some virtual landscaping would have been a really nice addition. ;)

So altering the image of the property is seen as not good when it goes too far... what about the agents picture on their business card? Is it ok to removed wrinkle, blemishes... take a few pounds off? LOL..... seriously... how far would be too far on that?

Well...I think, unless we're actaully selling ourselves (for $'s), we can rid those nasty little wrinkles. What say you? LOL

Sharon

You better believe it. Who wants to see my wrinkles? Not me! :)

I'm trying to fight the urge not to post too many times in here but this is such a great blog you started Jeff!! Kathy and Roberta, I'm about to fall out of my chair here!

OOPS....I think you must have.

JUN

2007

LOL... Roberta, you go girl!

Jeff, The key thing to do is to take the photo correctly in the first place.

Remove all distracting objects such as trash can, bikes etc
Try different angles to get the house in the best light and see the most of it
Frame the shot properly
Edit it by cropping, brightening, color correction
do not remove permanent objects such as utility poles
Brown grass..In NC all our warm weather grasses go brown in the winter. So if the photo was taken then and the home is still on the market in the spring go back and take another
Do not portray a false image..no-no!

Ginger

JUL

2007

Kitchen Taking a few minutes and picking up the strays can make a HUGE difference. There are NO ethical issues that one can possibly present with images that are edited in camera.

And, the nice touch was that the owner (standing behind me while I shot this with a point and shoot digital camera) said I needed to do all of the rooms. And that after looking at her house on the website, she might not want to move...

That makes me want to shoot stuff like this... Fuzzy Room

Lane... please don't start shooting photos like that. :)

AUG

2007

FEB

2008

I saw someone ask but never saw the response, so here it is.

Taken from NAR 2008 Realtor Code of Ethics:

Article 12
REALTORS^® shall be honest and truthful in their real estate communications and shall present a true picture in their advertising, marketing, and other representations.

NOV

DEC

AUG

Hi everyone. Where so many hours have been spent in convincing myself that I am right, is there not some reason to fear I may be wrong? I am from Vatican and too bad know English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "A cash advance loan provides a good alternative to bouncing a check, stained credit ratings as well as late payment charges." Thank :p Filia.

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?