Real estate photos worth more than a thousand words

There's a great article on a design blog that illustrates the difference between good and bad real estate photos. I've constantly wondered why Realtors walk around with their point-and-shoots and zero training & upload the results to the nearest MLS web site.

I would argue that in most cases the photographs make the rooms actually look *worse* than they may be in real life! Some differences between the typical agent photo and what a professional would do? How about these typical amateur house photo disclaimers:

• The actual walls aren't really bent inward at 30-degree angles.
• The house wasn't built on a backward sloping hill, or if it was the roof line does not follow said hill.
• The rooms aren't so dark in real life.
• There isn't always a nuclear blast right outside the window - the picture just makes it look that way.
• Oh - and the hardwood floors are a nice light brown, glossy finish. They just look dark gray and dirty in the pictures.

With over 80% of home buyers saying that the pictures on the MLS sites were "important in their buying decision", wouldn't it make sense to have the highest quality pictures possible on your listing? I know that I would, but some of my friends in the RE industry have told me that there is not a huge market for Cincinnati Real Estate photography when it comes to private residences until you get into really high-dollar homes. They seem to only pull out the big guns when it is for a large commercial site.

Maybe it's time I revisit the conversation and see if they'd like to try it out on a few new listings. I suspect that the decision comes down to how much margin is available for the agent to play with, and in this down market that may be quite little. Still, it seems like there must be a happy medium somewhere between an agent's P&S and a full-blown Hollywood production that would work for everyone involved.

You can check out the original article here: Real estate photos worth more than a thousand words.