The "have a look at this!" thread II

Deep_In_Debt

Pic 1...is that a jukebox?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40554062.html

fionajbanana

Look at the EER (photo 21) cannot see anything why its so low.

Also the photo names don't tally with the photo contents ie a photo of the kitchen has the description bedroom 1.

fionajbanana

Deep_In_Debt wrote: »

Pic 1...is that a jukebox?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40554062.html

It is. There is another jukebox in photo 6.

Not keen on the coloured ceilings. Makes them small and dark.

lauraland

Deep_In_Debt wrote: »

Pic 1...is that a jukebox?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40554062.html

It is. And its also another one for 'spot the cat'

Slinky

Deep_In_Debt wrote: »

Pic 1...is that a jukebox?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40554062.html

More than likely, there's others, and another odd cabinet plus what likes some sort of vending machine in the bathroom!

They don't spend a lot of time in the garden do they?

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

It's possible to have that number with House Network.

Personally, I think it's self-defeating. Nothing's left to the imagination. People often view because thet want to know what else there is.

It can't be an accident that some of the most successful agents only upload between 6 and 10 pictures, regardless of the price.

Would it boil down to "less is more" though? I would assume that a vendor should have one photo each of all the rooms in the house, one of the front of the house and one or two (dependant on layout) of back garden/yard. That way - viewers can see what everywhere in the house is like fully - but without overkill. Would imagine that most potential viewers think "No photo of that room means its bad (eg coloured bathroom suite)". So - no disappointed viewers and less chance of the vendor having their time wasted by someone who would have decided the property wouldnt do for them at the time they saw the details IF all the photos had been in place.

Just had a quick count in my own house brochure - and its between that 6-10 parameter anyway...:)

SleeplessinScandinavia

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Would it boil down to "less is more" though? I would assume that a vendor should have one photo each of all the rooms in the house, one of the front of the house and one or two (dependant on layout) of back garden/yard. That way - viewers can see what everywhere in the house is like fully - but without overkill. Would imagine that most potential viewers think "No photo of that room means its bad (eg coloured bathroom suite)". So - no disappointed viewers and less chance of the vendor having their time wasted by someone who would have decided the property wouldnt do for them at the time they saw the details IF all the photos had been in place.

Just had a quick count in my own house brochure - and its between that 6-10 parameter anyway...:)

Me too - last time I sold a home in the UK, there were 8 photos in the EA's spec.

Maybe its a question of balance...? While I think too many photos can be 'overkill', I've seen properties advertised with just one photo - of the front only.

Quite possibly, a house hunter might disregard it altogether, especially when there might be better advertised competition in the same area

....the joys of trying to sell a property....:D

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Would it boil down to "less is more" though? I would assume that a vendor should have one photo each of all the rooms in the house, one of the front of the house and one or two (dependant on layout) of back garden/yard. That way - viewers can see what everywhere in the house is like fully - but without overkill. Would imagine that most potential viewers think "No photo of that room means its bad (eg coloured bathroom suite)".:)

I don't make that assumption unless it's a kitchen or bathroom. To me, pictures of people's beds, which is often most of what is shown for bedrooms, are just a waste of space.

A good room plan is more use than many photos, and for smallholdings, which were my interest, a map of the land. Mostly, I didn't get either.

Estate agents are often very lazy. With smallholdings they rarely walk more than 50metres to take a photo.

SleeplessinScandinavia

Deep_In_Debt wrote: »

Pic 1...is that a jukebox?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-40554062.html

...maybe it was one of the selling points as there seems to be one in Pic 6 as well - and the property is listed as 'Sold STC'

StumpyPumpy

Davesnave wrote: »

I don't make that assumption unless it's a kitchen or bathroom. To me, pictures of people's beds, which is often most of what is shown for bedrooms, are just a waste of space.

A good room plan is more use than many photos, and for smallholdings, which were my interest, a map of the land. Mostly, I didn't get either.

Estate agents are often very lazy. With smallholdings they rarely walk more than 50metres to take a photo.

But isn't the argument for more pictures that some people (aka you) want to see pictures of the land a long way away (well 50m+ away) from the house, but think bedroom photos are a waste of space, while I think that seeing the bedrooms are important even if it does show mainly bed. It gives a sense of scale to the room and also shows all those nooks and crannies that, for instance, make having both a bed and a wardrobe impossible. I've seen plenty of rooms where the only place for the bed is up tight against the doors of the "built in storage" or with a double bed against a wall.

So the answer is to have pictures of both. Obviously, incompetently taken pictures are useless, but I don't see why having more pictures to include both the ones that you want and the pictures that I want would put potential buyers off viewing. I bet fewer pictures put off more buyers that it encourages.

In any case, the idea scenario for me would be getting only 1 viewing, quickly and by the eventual buyer rather than having troops of "Realty Tourists" through the house every weekend or "wanted to see whether a kingsize bed would fit in the single bedroom" people.

As a random example http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-25692846.html Ok, so the views are very nice, but I know that based on where it is, I don't need half the pictures to show it. But the EA obviously has his camera there, so, why no pictures of the 2 bedrooms or the ensuite? And how do the "entrance hall and hallway work? Am I really going to make a 450 mile round trip to "discover" what they look like? The EA may redeem himself with the "forthcoming video" but that is an aside, it isn't there yet. I think the internet could spare the space to have some enlightening photos of them.

SP