Hacker News Reader

Comment by al_be_back | Hacker News Reader

That's how all photos should be - original, no editing, no staging; If I want excitment, I can Prompt a Generative-AI platform to create mind-bendingly-creative imagery.

I've wasted so many days viewing flats/apartments because the Photos looked amazing, and the actual property was utterly awful.

issues: - narrow/steep Staircases - very old photos (now the place a dump) - fish-eye lenses (or similar) enlarging the space - etc etc et bloody cetera :(

nice post

View on HN

No editing you say? I raise you the funniest listing on the site: https://terriblerealestateagentphotos.com/post/6876067332328...

This looks like a sofa took a selfie

This was so well edited, I could only tell that it was fake since the sofa didn't have a reflection

> That's how all photos should be - original, no editing, no staging;

The second entry at the moment is an example of really bad staging.

The second one is the fake bookshelves one (at least for me). I think that the house really has been lived in with that hideous wall.

But yes there are plenty of bad staging photos, and at least one totally ridiculous photoshop (the sofa planted completely out of perpective and in front of a mirror that ought to be reflecting it).

well, either the 2nd photo is fake bookshelves (stock image, white-label), or it's a painting/decorating job gone horribly wrong lol

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1381671922/3d-books-on-shelv...

I’d guess it’s this. I think you can colour it yourself after you hang it.

I think the fake white bookshelf wallpaper has a certain aesthetic about it. I would like it in an AirBnB type of place, but definitely not in my own house.

I would also want it to actually fit on the wall and not be awkwardly cut off on the right edge.

> fish-eye lenses (or similar) enlarging the space

What focal length would you like the photos to be taken at?

28mm full frame

Because most smartphones are similar to that and most people will think of it as the standard camera field of view, or some other reason?

To be honest I was just joking/thought for a second and decided that 28mm probably sounds right: 16mm would be useful (would show a lot) but also deceptive (too wide), and anything more than 28mm like 35mm or 50mm would be too narrow for capturing a space.

Photos are basically showing you if the property is worth inspecting by hand. I've seen it go the other way too, terrible photos and a fine place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com