Editing fail shows real estate agent’s photo trick

PHOTO: For Sale. FILE

Greener grass, bluer skies, less toxic mould — an estate agent’s photoshop fail has revealed the tricks used to get you to buy.

A real estate company has been caught uploading the unedited version of a photo advertising a Queensland home, prompting questions about where the line is drawn for false advertising in the housing market.

Agents have long been cutting, blurring and airbrushing out undesirable traits in home listings, but without the original copies, it can be difficult to tell exactly how much artificial sprucing a property has had.

OUR $99 plus GST BANNER AD SALE IS ON! LIMITED

While there is no suggestion of illegal behaviour, LJ Hooker Southport this week pulled back the curtain on one common change when it accidentally uploaded both the edited and unedited images of a back garden.

Have a similar story? Get in touch

The unedited garden uploaded by LJ Hooker. Picture: LJ Hooker

The edited version. Picture: LJ Hooker

The pictures of the three-bed, two-bath Kumbari Ave home, which sold for $808,000 in December, showed two near-identical images of its sprawling garden with “room for a pool”.

In one, the lawn was displayed in all its natural glory, with the yellow grass typical of any Aussie backyard in summertime. In the second, the grass had been digitally altered to a bright, lush green, subtly concealing some of its drier dirt patches.

SPONSORED: Looking for a real estate database from $99 plus gst? | SALE

Many on social media said the photoshop fail was “one of the better ones” — citing more extreme examples like a fresh tin roof, new landscaping or entirely different floor coverings.

An LJ Hooker spokesperson maintained that their edit fell within the legal guidelines, saying: “LJ Hooker follows all legislative requirements when representing listings to ensure accurate representation of key features.” The unedited picture was taken down shortly after news.com.au’s inquiry.

Still, the mishap prompted many to ask, where is the housing market’s boundary between false advertising and fair play?

More drastic edits, like this digitally altered building for sale in Potts Point, must include an “artist’s impression” disclaimer. Picture: The Rubenstein Group

The industry rule of thumb is that, if something isn’t permanent, it can be photoshopped out, according to Real Estate Institute of Queensland CEO Antonia Mercorella.

“We often ask, if you were to purchase that house, would it be possible to have that undesirable attribute removed, and how much would it cost,” Ms Mercorella told news.com.au.

“We all understand that, in advertising, if we make a representation that isn’t accurate then that is potentially a breach of law. We can make that misrepresentation through photographs, and the same consumer laws apply.

“It’s not just undesirable characteristics. It could also be things that you’re adding to images that aren’t an accurate representation.”

Smaller digital alterations, Ms Mercorella said, present a legal grey area.

“Adding grass where there isn’t any, I think, is problematic,” she said.

“If you were to add a bit of green and make the property look slightly brighter, that’s usually passable.”

Crucially, though, she added: “Even if a consumer visits the property and finds it’s been misrepresented, and they decide not to buy or rent as a result, it doesn’t matter. That misleading conduct is still a breach of law.”

A $4m property recently sold in Launceston. Picture: Domain

An “artist’s impression” image with its landscaping redone, rusty roof covered up, cracks repaired and even the lines of the brick facade smoothed out. Picture: Domain.

The blurry boundary means photo retouching agencies have different standards for what they will accept.

Paul Gal, retouching manager at real estate marketer Campaigntrack, said in one industry memo outlining the kinds of edits he will perform: “We are allowed to make a home look as good as it would look on its best day.

“So, if the lawn is in a bad way now but a month ago it was green we can touch it up, but if it’s a dirt patch we won’t, unless it’s going to be returfed.”

The black and yellow safety coverings on powerlines similarly could be edited out, but the powerlines themselves must stay.

Other changes, like removing a cemented-in washing line or flooring that’s ready to be stripped back, could be made on a case-by-case basis, Mr Gal said.

Neighbours’ homes, he added, should never be styled, but washing can be digitally removed from their clotheslines and their yards tidied up.

More drastic edits to a property listing must, by law, include a disclaimer — usually the words: “Artist’s impression”.

In one property currently for sale in Sydney’s east — a Potts Point terrace that has been converted into three apartments, listed at $3.7m collectively by Luxe Listing’s The Rubenstein Group — almost all of the shots aren’t of the existing property, but rather what it might look like after a dramatic reno.

One Reddit user shared an image of a badly edited bathroom ceiling, with a clear line where stains had been covered. Picture: Reddit.

Similarly, a historic home that recently sold for a staggering $4m in Launceston, Tasmania featured an entirely new “digitally enhanced” garden and exterior.

Its landscaping had been entirely redone, its rusty roof covered up, cracks repaired and, bizarrely, even the lines of the brick facade smoothed out.

Plenty of social media users shared stories of homes they said had been edited almost beyond recognition.

“My neighbour recently had her home up for sale. Her real estate agents photoshopped grass over an area filled with rocks and weeds. The agents told my neighbour that ‘that’s what buyers expect’. Really? I’d rather see the property as is,” one Reddit user said.

Another image shared to the platform showed a poorly edited bathroom with a clear line where the new ceiling had been slapped on to cover stains.

Ray White made headlines in 2016 when a Sydney home appeared without the very large water tank that towers over it. Picture: Ray White

The same home, according to Google street view. Picture: Google Maps.

Without the original pictures, it can be difficult for buyers to tell what kind of makeover a property has received.

In 2016, a suburban Sydney home made headlines after a huge water tank towering over the property didn’t make it into the listing photos. Ray White said at the time the images hadn’t been doctored, and were simply taken from a more flattering angle.

In another Sydney unit up for rent in 2016, at least one image was found to have been digitally altered to obscure stained walls and badly ripped carpets. The listing was amended after an inquiry to NSW Fair Trading.

Often, the only conclusive insight into the digital sprucing process comes from awkward agent gaffes, like LJ Hooker’s greener grass.

The “Chernobyl green” grass of a home for sale in Adelaide. Picture: Property Gurus SA

The same home when it was sold in 2010. Picture: Raine & Horne.

In 2018, another Queensland real estate agency was left embarrassed by a photoshop fail that transformed the famously muddy Brisbane River into an electric blue waterway to rival the Whitsundays.

An Adelaide agency was similarly mocked last year when the lawn of an Elizabeth Downs home was shoddily edited, coloured what social media users described as “Chernobyl green” seemingly in Microsoft Paint.

“The reality is, consumers should expect that virtually all photographs have been digitally altered to some extent. That’s the point of hiring a professional photographer,” Ms Mercorella told this publication.

“The most obvious and simple solution is to physically inspect the premises whenever possible, or send a trusted person to inspect it on your behalf.”

adsense