Real Estate

[Robert Weaver]

Was responding to :
Not true at all in the case of production, but if you don't understand the previous 10 points, and aren't in the agency industry, you won't understand this. If you think you'll have issues being ethical, in any business, you're right to stay away.

You don't have to be an agent to understand this. There are plenty of things that can go wrong with this scenario. One could use professional services to lower their official commission as to avoid paying higher brokerage fees. Also many associations including my local association doesn't allow supra access for professional services. You are only supposed to use that access for showing homes to potential buyers. There are realtors that I know of who violate that rule all the time. If you will have an interest in any property that you provide your professional service on you are supposed to notify all parties that you are a realtor. Also if you are an active realtor you can overhear confidential information that you shouldn't be privy too. This information could be used unfairly if you decide to bring a buyer to the table.

Yes, I do understand fully.

 

[Robert Weaver]

Is your permanent number the same as your temp? I want to file for a 107 waiver and 60 day less 60 days losing some revenue opportunities.

It should be the same. Your temp drivers license has your official license number on it.

 

[GadgetGuy]

the last 2 pages of camera talk and name calling were great and all but it was a bit of a digression from some of the original questions...

So what I got out of some of the comments about giving my friend aerial pictures for his resume service website is that;
1. If I purposely make a flight to take specific pictures of what he wants for his website that I would need a 107 cert.
2. BUT, If I showed him some of my old photos and videos I took for hobby purposes and he thought they'd be good for his website that I would NOT need a 107 cert.?
who determines the "intent of flight"? who checks that?

please correct me if I read those comments wrong...
Also, where is this information coming from? could someone cite the specific website/ paragraph this comes from?

Yes and Yes. Intent is subjective, but has to be measured objectively. If you have a 107 cert, it's harder to claim hobbyist, but still reasonable, as 107 flyers can fly in all Class G for any purpose without notifying anyone. The circumstances as a whole would need to be evaluated to determine your intent. If you never sold anything before and never demonstrated any intent to do so when the images were shot, you should be in the clear.

 

[GadgetGuy]

You can say the same about Real Estate photographers. The better agents know that they can't take professional photos so why would they think they can fly and take professional photos? In any service business model you have to deliver a service 'photo' better and more cost effective than the client "realtor" can do on they're own. Drones get expense when you crash them and or take poor images.

DJI's intent is to make it so easy and cheap that even the most incompetent real estate agent can shoot their own aerial video and photos of acceptable quality without crashing, and without risking more than $999. Add in an Osmo, and an iPhone, and you have a full service real estate photo package for cheaper than the cost of hiring a professional to shoot a single property!

Keep in mind that the results only need to be acceptable, not stellar. The bar among other listings is so low, that anything aerial not from Google and anything not shot on a cell phone will stand out. Keep in mind that it's the content/subject being depicted, and not the quality of the video or images that is being sold. Big difference. Buyer isn't buying the video. The slicker the video, the greater the level of disappointment when seeing the house in person!

 

[Robert Weaver]

DJI's intent is to make it so easy and cheap that even the most incompetent real estate agent can shoot their own aerial video and photos of acceptable quality without crashing, and without risking more than $999. Add in an Osmo, and an iPhone, and you have a full service real estate photo package for cheaper than the cost of hiring a professional to shoot a single property!

It's not the equipment. It's the time that it takes to do a decent job. In the hour or two or three that if would take you to do all that stuff you could have been working on several list agreements.

 

[GadgetGuy]

The better agents also know that they are best and most effective when signing listing agreements rather than wasting time trying to photograph a home. It takes time to properly photography a home. All the while they could be doing other things.

In a tight real estate market, with high end homes, the best use of the agent's time may be doing it themselves. They have to be there anyway! Access to strangers for professional services is more complicated on high end properties. The seller only knows you. If your supply of sellers wanting to sign listing agreements is unlimited, that would change, but that is rarely the case!

 

[Robert Weaver]

The slicker the video, the greater the level of disappointment when seeing the house in person!

The object is to get the person to come see the home in person. If the slick video does that then it has done it's job. The only disappointment that comes is when deception is used to fool the potential buyer. That's where hiring the RIGHT photographer is key.

 

[GadgetGuy]

It's not the equipment. It's the time that it takes to do a decent job. In the hour or two or three that if would take you to do all that stuff you could have been working on several list agreements.

See post above. Decent isn't necessary. Acceptable is all that is required. Listing appointments are neither infinite nor unlimited. If you do, indeed, have a potential listing appointment, that is not the time to schedule your real estate photography. How about immediately after, though?

 

[Robert Weaver]

See post above. Decent isn't necessary. Acceptable is all that is required. Listing appointments are neither infinite nor unlimited. If you do, indeed, have a potential listing appointment, that is not the time to schedule your real estate photography. How about immediately after, though?

I've never heard one homeowner say that their previous or current agent photos were acceptable. It's been quite the opposite! Most are fed up with the mediocrity and laziness on the agents part.

 

[GadgetGuy]

The object is to get the person to come see the home in person. If the slick video does that then it has done it's job. The only disappointment that comes is when deception is used to fool the potential buyer. That's where hiring the RIGHT photographer is key.

Exactly! No photoshopping out power lines in the view. However, if the video is too slick and the property is average (most are average, by definition), it could be a let down. Smart agents presell the negative. "You'll love it, but the back yard is tiny!" Buyer viewing the small yard, "Oh, it's not that small!" Don't over do it! It's not a Hollywood production. Just good enough to whet their interest and want to see the house in person!

 

[GadgetGuy]

I've never heard one homeowner say that their previous or current agent photos were acceptable. It's been quite the opposite! Most are fed up with the mediocrity and laziness on the agents part.

The photos are not for the owner. Acceptable for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose.

 

[Robert Weaver]

Exactly! No photoshopping out power lines in the view. However, if the video is too slick and the property is average (most are average, by definition), it could be a let down. Smart agents presell the negative. "You'll love it, but the back yard is tiny!" Buyer viewing the small yard, "Oh, it's not that small!" Don't over do it! It's not a Hollywood production. Just good enough to whet their interest and want to see the house in person!

And that's why I said hiring the right photographer is important. The right photographer will know how to best show the property. I usually take 10-15 minutes to walk the property and house to get an idea on how to best shoot it. Most run n gun guys start firing away as soon as they walk in the door.

 

[Robert Weaver]

The photos are not for the owner. Acceptable for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose.

Define acceptable.

 

[Robert Weaver]

The photos are not for the owner. Acceptable for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose.

From my experience in shooting real estate "The photos made the house look too good" is just a nice way of saying we don't like your house. It has nothing to do with making it look too good. Taking crappy photos of a crappy home only makes it look worse. Taking good photos actually gives the potential buyer a better look at the home. There is no way to make it look "too good" unless you Photoshop the whole thing and overdo fake and unnatural lighting.

Do you think people are let down at BK when their burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu? No! What they care about is how the burger taste.

 

[Robert Weaver]

The photos are not for the owner. Acceptable for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose.

This was a $108K home I shot. The house went under contract in just under 2 days. There were people literally wanting the first offer to fall through so they could buy the home. The ink wasn't even dry on the flyers before the home was sold. I just captured what was there. You think the photos might have had something to do with that demand? Do you think the it would have had the same response with "acceptable" iPhone photos?

 

[GadgetGuy]

Define acceptable.

I just did: Acceptable "for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose."

 

[GadgetGuy]

And that's why I said hiring the right photographer is important. The right photographer will know how to best show the property. I usually take 10-15 minutes to walk the property and house to get an idea on how to best shoot it. Most run n gun guys start firing away as soon as they walk in the door.

That's why, all else being equal, the listing agent themselves is the best qualified person to know how to show the property, and what to shoot and how. Would the owner want the listing agent to defer to a real estate photographer on how to show the property? What qualifies a real estate photographer to know how to sell real estate?

 

[GadgetGuy]

From my experience in shooting real estate "The photos made the house look too good" is just a nice way of saying we don't like your house. It has nothing to do with making it look too good. Taking crappy photos of a crappy home only makes it look worse. Taking good photos actually gives the potential buyer a better look at the home. There is no way to make it look "too good" unless you Photoshop the whole thing and overdo fake and unnatural lighting.

Do you think people are let down at BK when their burger doesn't look exactly like the picture on the menu? No! What they care about is how the burger taste.

I used the word acceptable, and I defined it. It isn't crappy. It isn't too good. It is just "good" as you are using the word "good photography."

You just made my point. The consumer of the burger isn't buying burger photography. They are going to be eating the burger. However, if the photo looks 10x better than the actual burger, when I get there, I am likely to not even consider buying or eating the burger, no matter how good it may taste!

 

[GadgetGuy]

This was a $108K home I shot. The house went under contract in just under 2 days. There were people literally wanting the first offer to fall through so they could buy the home. The ink wasn't even dry on the flyers before the home was sold. I just captured what was there. You think the photos might have had something to do with that demand? Do you think the it would have had the same response with "acceptable" iPhone photos?

So, now you are taking credit for the house sale because you simply captured what was there? The listing was clearly underpriced, creating an excessive demand. FMV is defined as the price obtained after a normal marketing period. 2 days is premature.

"Acceptable for the purposes of getting the prospective buyer to want to see the house in person, without creating a let down is the only purpose." The above photo is a good photo and it would have been acceptable, by my definition.

Whether an iPhone photo is acceptable depends upon whether it did the job of getting a prospective buyer to want to see the house in person. With the right lighting, I could easily replicate the photo above with an iPhone. After all, all you did was capture what was there! Candidly, you did more than that. You lit it well, which is 90% of the job in real estate interiors. I was only suggesting that with your perfect lighting setup, that even an iPhone could have captured that image. The biggest weakness of an iPhone is they require perfect lighting to get a shot indistinguishable from a big boy camera. Your talent and equipment provided the lighting.

However, by your own words, in this case, your photograph on the flyer had nothing to do with the sale. "The ink wasn't even dry on the flyers before the home was sold."

 

[Robert Weaver]

However, by your own words, in this case, your photograph on the flyer had nothing to do with the sale. "The ink wasn't even dry on the flyers before the home was sold."

MLS. This wasn't the only home in that area and neighborhood like that for sale.