I talked to a producer today from ABC News that is working on a piece ABC is producing on the subject of photos that misrepresent properties. She was looking for examples of cases where marketing photos misrepresented properties to buyers. This well documented case in Melbourne about a year ago that I posted on was the only one that I could come up with.

We discussed that:

1. The selling agent typically has the legal responsibility to make sure that the marketing materials do not misrepresent the property being sold.
2. Buyers do not purchase property based on just the photos. Personal inspection and physical inspections by professional inspectors are a key part of purchasing a property.
3. Doing sky replacement, fireplace flame addition, using ultra wide-angle lenses and HDR is standard practice in the industry although some buyers undoubtedly believe that these techniques misrepresent.
4. Fifty years of TV marketing has made the public pretty sophisticated marketing consumers.

My assessment is that photo misrepresentation was not a significant issue in real estate photography and that a more interesting story would the misrepresentation that goes on the covers of woman’s magazines. But she says the’ve already done that!

What do you think? Is real estate photography misrepresentation an issue? She will be reading this, tell her what you think and give her examples.