| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/08/2004 11:56:50 PM · #1 |
i think there should be a market for us photog.'s in real estate photography. They are selling a $250,000 property.. and gave crap for a picture to try and drum up interest... this doesn't seem quite right.
take this one for example.
not only is it crooked, low quality, and taken from the seat of the car (the window is the frame... very poor)... it was 500 KB... a tree is in the way of the back corner.... yet the building is for sale for $250,000 . i think they should have a photo to back it.
|
|
|
|
03/09/2004 12:29:28 AM · #2 |
The problem with this is...
A picture, no matter how good it is, doesnt sell the house.
The house itself, the neighborhood, the school district, etc. sell the house.
With the addition of Digital cameras, realtors dont really need us. Just my opinion anyway. |
|
|
|
03/09/2004 12:40:43 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by outofreachx:
The problem with this is...
A picture, no matter how good it is, doesnt sell the house.
The house itself, the neighborhood, the school district, etc. sell the house.
With the addition of Digital cameras, realtors dont really need us. Just my opinion anyway. |
So true. Here in San Francisco you can find a house with 2 or 3 bedrooms and 2 baths for $600-$700,000 if you're lucky. Of course the further away the cheaper.
By the time you see the picture in a realtor book, it's sold. So why bother with a great picture. |
|
|
|
03/09/2004 12:57:33 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
Originally posted by outofreachx:
The problem with this is...
A picture, no matter how good it is, doesnt sell the house.
The house itself, the neighborhood, the school district, etc. sell the house.
With the addition of Digital cameras, realtors dont really need us. Just my opinion anyway. |
So true. Here in San Francisco you can find a house with 2 or 3 bedrooms and 2 baths for $600-$700,000 if you're lucky. Of course the further away the cheaper.
By the time you see the picture in a realtor book, it's sold. So why bother with a great picture. |
That will change soon,don't worry! :-) |
|
|
|
03/09/2004 01:01:33 AM · #5 |
I know what you mean, I have been looking for a home online and the photos are just horrid....
James
|
|
|
|
03/09/2004 01:10:53 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by outofreachx:
The problem with this is...
A picture, no matter how good it is, doesnt sell the house.
The house itself, the neighborhood, the school district, etc. sell the house.
With the addition of Digital cameras, realtors dont really need us. Just my opinion anyway. |
no i agree it doesn't sell the house.. be it does create initial interest, gives the buyers an idea if they think it is worth 'checking out'
|
|
|
|
03/09/2004 01:19:20 AM · #7 |
The problem is you will waste a huge abount in travel time and processing time for one picture ... the real estate agent's job is to do that driving around.
Now, if you really want to cash in on this activity, give WORKSHOPS for RE agents to teach them how to take better photos than they do ... better to have 5-6 people pay you $50 each for a 3 hour class (or, if you are really audacious, charge $350), than to spend that time taking two or three photos for $10 each.
Message edited by author 2004-03-09 01:19:48. |
|
|
|
03/09/2004 08:04:11 AM · #8 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/22/2025 12:38:41 PM EDT.
