A few of my regular “favourites” make appearances yet again, in today’s post.
Terrible photography, is one thing. But terrible photography – that includes a reflection of the photographer is another.
I’m also a huge “fan” of photos of inanimate objects in properties, like a chair, a light fixture, or a high-def, close-up of a Chia Pet sitting on the kitchen counter.
Here are a few recent beauties…
Remember in the last edition when I showed you a photo of a bed, in a bedroom, and asked what was wrong with it?
Well, the bed was taken at a certain angle, and didn’t show what the second photo did: that there was 2-inches of room between the bed and the wall.
So with that in mind, take a look at this photo below, of what looks like a gorgeous sectional couch setup in a large living room, and consider “what could be wrong with this?”
Well again, you have to consider what’s on the other side of the camera lens.
And as you’ll see below, perhaps the photographer, listing agent, and seller, should have, would have, could have been cheeky, and not shown the buyer what’s to the left of the living “room”…
Yes folks, that’s your classic “appliance wall” kitchen, which most buyers hate.
It works in a lot of condos, especially if you use a free-standing island to break up the space.
But that’s the key thing here – you need space, otherwise you basically have a couch staring at your kitchen wall.
I mean hey, why not put a TV over the sink?
You know I hate photos of inanimate objects on MLS, right?
You get up to twenty photos in the MLS listing, so why do some listing agents use photos of a china doll on a window ledge, instead of a wide angle of the living space?
I know, I know – it’s “artistic.”
But I don’t think it works.
Check out the array below.
These are first six photos of a condo for sale, which shows two bathrooms, then a faucet running, then……wait…..what the hell is that fourth photo?
Oh, silly me.
Not really sure what kind of rope, or what it’s for. But it’s definitely rope.
Or maybe not.
I have no clue.
But why the hell are we debating what that’s a photo of?
Why not show photos of, well, you know the CONDO!?!?!
Here’s a classic photo of the inside of the oven.
Great. Your agent earned his money.
And notice how the photo has that “peephole” effect with the blacked out corners of the frame?
Do you ever wonder, “Will the $1,000,000 house we’re looking at have a sink,” or do you just assume it will?
Some agents are going to great depths to show you that, hey, you don’t need to worry – there’s a sink in the kitchen.
Oh – and water comes out of the faucet…
Another classic MLS Musing: photographers in the photos.
How could anybody put this on MLS to represent his or her property for sale?
Then you’ve got this one below, which saves us the actual person in the frame, but I still find my mind wandering away from actually looking at the property and it’s features and finishes:
This is fantastic.
Not only can you see 80% of the photographer’s entire being, but you also see his tripod, and you can kind of make our a smirk on his face.
I wonder if he was thinking, “There’s no way I’m getting myself in this shot.”
The question of the day: which hand was this girl’s camera in?
And what model iPhone did she shoot with?
On a related note: don’t you love a good finger-shot?
I’ll be honest, I haven’t seen one on MLS in a while.
But good things come to those who wait…
The following three photos will seem very boring, but trust me – there’s method to this madness.
Take a look at all three, then look at them again.
Then tell me what they have in common, and what’s wrong:
So what’s the issue?
The photos are terrible. True, but I was going for something else.
They condo should have been staged. True, but again, there’s more to this.
There’s four smudges on the camera lens, and they show up in the same spot in every single photo!
Last, but certainly not least, folks, I give you the creepiest MLS photo I’ve seen in quite some time.
Many photos are taken by the agent, on their iPhone, which is awful and cheap.
Many photos are taken by photographers who smudge their breakfast on the camera lens, and that’s no good.
But what about feature photos of a house, taken by a stalker hiding in the bushes, at night?