Comments on: Strategies to Stay Within the Law When Editing Digital Photos http://photographyforrealestate.net/2007/08/13/strategies-to-stay-within-the-law-when-editing-digital-photos/ Helping Real Estate Photographers Be Successful Thu, 24 May 2012 14:11:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: MrRobert http://photographyforrealestate.net/2007/08/13/strategies-to-stay-within-the-law-when-editing-digital-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-941 MrRobert Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:38:19 +0000 http://photographyforrealestate.info/?p=149#comment-941 I second motion # 2 I second motion # 2

]]> By: Athol Kay http://photographyforrealestate.net/2007/08/13/strategies-to-stay-within-the-law-when-editing-digital-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-943 Athol Kay Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:36:19 +0000 http://photographyforrealestate.info/?p=149#comment-943 I think you're confusing the issues slightly. When a buyer buys a house and is told "The Oil Tank is the backyard was removed ten years ago", and in fact it was just filled with sand by someones uncle, that sort of thing is what the Association is talking about. Photography is a little different in that a buyer can look at the photos and then go actually look at what the photos are of. It can be a fine line at times, but ultimately the ethics issue kicks in after the sales issue does for photos. I think once you start taking shots better than the naked eye can see, or shooting things that purposely decive the buyer, you just start pissing them off because its obvious you're trying to fool them. And pissed off buyers don't buy the house. If you're shooting a $300,000 home with more special effects, lighting and editing than a Hollywood movie... I think you’re confusing the issues slightly. When a buyer buys a house and is told “The Oil Tank is the backyard was removed ten years ago”, and in fact it was just filled with sand by someones uncle, that sort of thing is what the Association is talking about.

Photography is a little different in that a buyer can look at the photos and then go actually look at what the photos are of. It can be a fine line at times, but ultimately the ethics issue kicks in after the sales issue does for photos.

I think once you start taking shots better than the naked eye can see, or shooting things that purposely decive the buyer, you just start pissing them off because its obvious you’re trying to fool them.

And pissed off buyers don’t buy the house.

If you’re shooting a $300,000 home with more special effects, lighting and editing than a Hollywood movie…

]]> By: John Grow http://photographyforrealestate.net/2007/08/13/strategies-to-stay-within-the-law-when-editing-digital-photos/comment-page-1/#comment-942 John Grow Tue, 14 Aug 2007 03:30:27 +0000 http://photographyforrealestate.info/?p=149#comment-942 This is a good article. I have run into agents that have no reservations asking to have the yard cleaned, or show a view that could only be seen from the roof, or other crazy requests. There was one that had listed a house in a prominent Bay Area beach community and wanted a copy of the beach shown with the house. However that view could not be seen from the house and in reality was more than a half mile away! This is a good article.

I have run into agents that have no reservations asking to have the yard cleaned, or show a view that could only be seen from the roof, or other crazy requests. There was one that had listed a house in a prominent Bay Area beach community and wanted a copy of the beach shown with the house. However that view could not be seen from the house and in reality was more than a half mile away!

]]>