Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Real Estate photographers and malpractice
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Oct 9, 2019 06:07:37   #
sb Loc: Florida's East Coast
 
After looking at real estate photos recently, I have learned that many times a wide angle lens has been used in a way that makes small rooms look much larger. At first glance the room may seem large. Also, it is hard to really tell what the flooring is like in a lot of photos - is it crappy synthetic or real hardwood? Are these the ways you have been mislead?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 06:47:15   #
Metis407 Loc: Canada
 
It really is misrepresentation. If the property is listed with an agent of a company, the law requires that in either verbal description or photograph accurately represent the property.
This also covers ommiting relevant information. For example the property is subject to flooding or someone was murdered in the house.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 06:48:28   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Vietnam Vet wrote:
So I have been house hunting. The first step is looking at photos of houses online. I saw a couple of houses that looked great and I drove an hour to see them. The reality is the houses suck. I know your job is to create interest in the property, but at what point do you call it photographic malpractice?


It's not up to the photographer. The photographer usually works for the seller's agent. Occasionally they work for owner. The client (owner and/or agent) decides how they want their property represented. When the photographer is either the agent or the owner, then it could be fraud, but not "malpractice" as you characterize it. Malpractice is a legal term - and it involves incompetence on the part of the service provider and harm (physical or financial) to the victim of malpractice. Oh, and yes, there is usually a contract that says a service provider is providing goods and services to a client. You were under no obligation to look at houses, you did not have a contract with anyone, and other than a little time and a little gas - you were not damaged or harmed - but it was entirely your choice to spend the time and gas.

That's probably what Judge Judy would say, just before she says, Case dismissed! We're done here! Next case!

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 07:11:10   #
Resqu2 Loc: SW Va
 
My Wife was a Realtor for a while, she found a house for a family member that looked great in pictures, nice open yard on one side but when they arrived there was another house built way way to close on the side that had no photos. I felt like that was wrong and it wasted everyone’s time and gas to go see it. Another situation was a house with a power transmission tower right in the back yard but no pics of it. Another wasted trip.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 07:26:21   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
Vietnam Vet wrote:
So I have been house hunting. The first step is looking at photos of houses online. I saw a couple of houses that looked great and I drove an hour to see them. The reality is the houses suck. I know your job is to create interest in the property, but at what point do you call it photographic malpractice?


Was the real house different than the images on line? If so, how were they different? Were the images doctored in PP? Was the house a different color, where things missing in the real house in comparison to the images on line?
Please answer all of these questions and then WE will decide if it is photographic malpractice. You have supplied NO proof so far of such a charge. Nor have you given any examples.
Are you also trying to impeach someone without the facts?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 07:46:16   #
jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY
 
billnikon wrote:
Was the real house different than the images on line? If so, how were they different? Were the images doctored in PP? Was the house a different color, where things missing in the real house in comparison to the images on line?
Please answer all of these questions and then WE will decide if it is photographic malpractice. You have supplied NO proof so far of such a charge. Nor have you given any examples.
Are you also trying to impeach someone without the facts?


Exactly!!! Let's all stop hypothesizing and get the facts first.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 08:37:43   #
f8lee Loc: New Mexico
 
Is any of this different than the cases where folks are all upset that the advertisement photo for a Burger King Whopper looks infinitely better that the burger actually delivered at the counter (I recall there being a legal kerfuffle over this a few years back).

It’s advertising, plain and simple. Like padding a resume, the purpose is to bring attention, and apparently the photos in question worked. I believe there are today online services dedicated to tweaking real estate photos where you send in your snapshots and they insert dramatic skies or create HDR like effects, for a few bucks a shot.

I mean, really, is it any different than when you find somebody on an online dating site and discover when you meet them they look rather different than they did in the stylized photos etc.?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 08:47:11   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
f8lee wrote:
Is any of this different than the cases where folks are all upset that the advertisement photo for a Burger King Whopper looks infinitely better that the burger actually delivered at the counter (I recall there being a legal kerfuffle over this a few years back).

It’s advertising, plain and simple. Like padding a resume, the purpose is to bring attention, and apparently the photos in question worked. I believe there are today online services dedicated to tweaking real estate photos where you send in your snapshots and they insert dramatic skies or create HDR like effects, for a few bucks a shot.

I mean, really, is it any different than when you find somebody on an online dating site and discover when you meet them they look rather different than they did in the stylized photos etc.?
Is any of this different than the cases where folk... (show quote)


You are correct. Do folks think photo's in magazines are real? NO WAY, folks bodies are heavily altered to suit the advertiser.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 08:54:24   #
jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY
 
There are 24 posts here. 2 from the OP. The second says.."...exactly..." like comparing a picture of a burger to the actual burger. If this is his complaint...I am surprised. The OP is not a neophyte. I see him quite a bit on this site. Notwithstanding any of the valid comments so far; he knows better. This was a gratuitous post.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 08:57:24   #
ELNikkor
 
My friend markets houses. She has a whole set of furniture and fixings she puts into the house to make it look attractive, and a good photographer who lights it and shoots it just right. If someone decides to buy it, she takes everything out and puts it back in storage, and the buyer gets a bare, less-attractive house.

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 09:05:12   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Vietnam Vet wrote:
So I have been house hunting. The first step is looking at photos of houses online. I saw a couple of houses that looked great and I drove an hour to see them. The reality is the houses suck. I know your job is to create interest in the property, but at what point do you call it photographic malpractice?


I scanned the thread so far, but I have yet to see you explanation of what was wrong or deceptive about the photos. Was it actual deception, like the photos show a two story colonial but it is actually a small ranch? Was the photo obviously taken just after the house was built 35 years ago but it is now a dilapidated post fire shell? Or is it just the photographer made the photos look nice by taking them on a sunny day while your visit was on a rainy one? Really, what are you basing your claim of malpractice on?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 09:15:08   #
Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington State, home since 2002
 
ELNikkor wrote:
My friend markets houses. She has a whole set of furniture and fixings she puts into the house to make it look attractive, and a good photographer who lights it and shoots it just right. If someone decides to buy it, she takes everything out and puts it back in storage, and the buyer gets a bare, less-attractive house.
Staging a home is an art, right down to having warm-from-the-oven cookies on the kitchen counter. The goal of staging is to make the home look warm and welcoming while keeping the furniture and wall colors neutral (and uncluttered) enough so that buyers can envision their own lives there. They know the furniture is not included in the sale, so there's no deception - only a nudge to help their imaginations

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 09:34:43   #
davidrb Loc: Hangar i13
 
MT Shooter wrote:
Hmmm, ever compared a McDonalds burger to the poster on the wall????


Do you remember Lt. Dan in the movie "Forrest(sp?) Gump"? Aluminum legs and all? The viewer got to see the actor walk on aluminum legs. This actually happened, in the movie, in a photograph. Remember the adage: "Painters add subjects while photographers remove them"?

| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 10:07:57   #
Abo Loc: Victoria Australia
 
billnikon wrote:
You are correct. Do folks think photo's in magazines are real? NO WAY, folks bodies are heavily altered to suit the advertiser.


That's not always true.

There are lots of "10s" that are a "10" SOOC... ;-)



| Reply
Oct 9, 2019 10:13:32   #
fetzler Loc: North West PA
 
I have bought and sold homes several times. The best thing to do is work with a professional realtor. By professional I mean someone who does this job full time. The best ones that I have used have been male but I did use a terrific woman as well.

When I sold my house in CT I had an offer in 3 days and when I sold my father's house I had a offer in 60min for full price. ( I didn't take the offer because I did not like the folks) Accepted another full price offer within 10 days. In purchasing a home I spoke with a realtor for 2 hours on the phone describing my ideal home. She met us at the hotel and drove us to the home we purchased. (Yes, we looked at others but the first was best)

Photos are OK but really have see with your own eyes. I once saw a house where the shower was so small that you could not bend down and pick up a dropped bar of soap. A photo for the shower would have looked just fine.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.