Selling a housePosted: 23.10.2013
As a property obsessive, I’ve seen thousands of property details, entered Rightmove searches and looked up properties in every continent. For no better reason than that I’m fascinated.
One of the biggest downfalls of these showcases is the photographs. I’ve noticed a pattern.
Most agents use an employee to take the photos. Do vendors know that the new recruit armed with a camera that’s worth thousands drive off, point and shoot and then upload these bad – no, atrocious – no, useless images onto property portals. Are they happy paying 2% for this lazy workmanship?
One of the goals each agent seems to aim for is portraying homes with a reference to some greenery. Some homes (estates) are just stunning from all angles. Most (the cities and dingy suburbs) need the photographer to have the agility of a stretchy man to get leaves and branches in the shot.
And they do try.
I can guess that for more than a few someone has laid down on the pavement and clicked; or climbed the tree to ensure leaves appear in front of the net-curtained window. Is this part of their job spec?
Sure. There’s a certain appeal to a sash window with a branch of copper beech just in view. (“Oh, I’d love to live there!”) Or a Victorian terraced house where cherry tree leaves shade a full view. (“Ooh, we could pick cherries and make jam in the summer!” Forget it, the birds get them first.)
In today’s search I’ve seen homes almost entirely obscured by diseased foliage. (“Ah, the house is a dump if they won’t show it.”)
The worst is a bushy, green specimen, round in shape, virtually blocking the whole house. Like a toxic cloud of green clinging to the road. Where’s the house? Or are they selling the tree?
I know I could take better shots, I just know it.