I’d like to think so, but I’m not so sure. I shot this one and some others over 16 months ago, and the sale closes today. Maybe it wasn’t my pictures. Doubtful they helped or hurt, but I wonder how much of the real estate business depends on photography. It’s sort of a complex issue, because as a seller, I’m trying to show the goods without showing the bads. I think the law requires me to disclose the bads, but nothing says I have to show them in photography. And as a buyer, I’d prefer to see more journalistic photos. Let me be the one to decide how cool it is. Beyond all that, how much is the selling agent willing to spend on photography? And with the digital landscape evolving so rapidly, and taking great pictures with no experience being easier than ever, will there ever be a market for outsourced real estate photography?
Tags: austin, austin real estate, austin texas, austin texas home for sale, carlton wade, carlton wade photography, hill country, landscape photography, photography, real estate photography, texas, texas hill country
December 30, 2008 at 5:33 pm |
Well, that photo makes the place look very … buyable. The angle and the lighting make the place look so comfortable.
December 31, 2008 at 8:41 pm |
Your photos do…..
ML
January 18, 2009 at 6:52 pm |
Absolutely!
Most buyers begin their search on the Internet. The home’s photos are what entices a buyer to view the home, the more buyer showings the better the opporunity to sell.
You can’t sell it if no one is looking.
Yes, photos sell and they enable the home seller to sell at a higher price… more lookers…etc.
January 18, 2009 at 7:26 pm |
Thanks for the comment, Phyllis. But what about my last question? cw