Real estate agents are in the middle of an ethical debate surrounding their use of creative license in their MLS listings. Property sellers and real estate agents looking for that elusive “edge” are skirting the ethical boundaries of the law by airbrushing property photographs before posting them on the local MLS or their websites.
The National Association of Realtors says that 83% of home buyers search the internet before buying. Given that most of these net-savvy buyers can look at a huge number of listings very quickly, they can just as quickly rule out many properties based on what they see in the pictures. And as internet users continues to increase, airbrushed or retouched photos are becoming ubiquitous.
Two years ago, Jonathan Miller, a Manhattan real estate appraiser, bought a house outside New York City. Shortly after the sale, he looked up the listing on the Web site of the seller’s agent and noticed something unusual: The utility lines running over his house were nowhere to be seen in the listing photo. They had been airbrushed out of the picture. Although he would have bought the house anyway, Miller says, he was annoyed by the falsified photo.
“We physically saw the property, and therefore the utility lines, before buying, but did they really need to modify the photo that much? It didn’t really seem right, either legally or ethically.”
Miller posed this question on his blog, and agents and graphic designers across the country debated the ethics of altering photos to show homes in their best light. Some saw no problem with it; others said it crossed a line. “I was really surprised by the debate,” Miller says. “But it seems like what happened to me was one of the least-harmful examples.”
Home photos for real estate listings are taken by agents or professional photographers. Some agents rely solely on photographing the best angle. Other agents upload photos into a software program such as Photoshop, where they can crop, edit and visually enhance the images. It’s still a gray area about how much “Photoshopping” is too much. The National Association of Realtors’ code of ethics requires agents to provide a true picture, although some touching up is allowed. So it’s up to each agent to decide what the limitations are.
Before & After


Randy Cohen, who writes “The Ethicist” column for The New York Times Magazine, calls it unambiguously unethical and deliberately deceitful. “There’s no such thing as an objective photo unless you take it from all angles. You might photograph the backyard from a particular angle to emphasize the view of the waterfall, and no one would quibble. But if you deliberately remove a bush to get that view, you’re definitely crossing the line. Deliberately obscuring the fact that there’s a landfill across the street is not ethical.
“Sellers should set a slightly higher standard and give potential buyers a clear understanding of what the house is like. To do that, you should select a certain view of the room, yard or house and present that to the public. The more you deviate from that, the less ethical your conduct.”
Bart Wilson, chief marketing officer of Voyager International, a firm that does photo and video graphics for real estate companies, says, “It’s kosher to Photoshop out a garden hose mistakenly lying out on the front lawn or make a sunset look more colorful. It’s another thing to remove trees and make the neighbor’s house look 4 acres away instead of right next door.”
Others will alter a photograph and then put a disclaimer on it or nearby, stating that the photograph has been visually enhanced.
For now, it’s best that you ask your Realtor up front. Sellers should confirm whether their Realtor will doctor photographs; buyers should ask their Realtor to confirm with listing agents the absense of (or the identity of) any doctored photographs.
For the record, Price & Company Realty does not permit the publication of any altered photographs in any of our listings.