Is this coming to or does it already exist in your state?
Are Sky Swaps Still Legal? New 2026 law for Real Estate Photos
- Thread starter sarahb
- Start date
I really don't see any harm in sky replacement and brightening the image to make it more appealing. I do, however, see where removing objects (permanent objects) that create an "eye sore" or misrepresent the property to be a major issue, as it changes everything. If, in the event I remove powerlines, cars, or any obstacles, I provide the client with both and let them decide. As the guy in the video stated, if the client decides to use the edited image, it then falls on them. I do think I will start including some type of statement as he discussed, to protect myself, though.
For now, it is not a law in Alabama, but I think it is only right that transparency is important in ANY buying/selling experience.
For now, it is not a law in Alabama, but I think it is only right that transparency is important in ANY buying/selling experience.
FLDave
Well-Known Member
Check with your MLS provider. When listing on the MLS they have specific requirements as to what and how you list picture information which is not exact. If you are not listing with MLS they you just have to be truthful; otherwise and unhappy buy might have a reason to claim untruthful advertise.
To my knowledge MLS does permit sky replacement--even though it often looks out of place.
To my knowledge MLS does permit sky replacement--even though it often looks out of place.
Thank you for your input. I really don't have a problem providing a disclaimer and agree that many images that I have seen have been altered to the point that it no longer represents what the property truly looks like. An example that comes to mind is a listing that had "inground" pool had been digitally removed and the color of the house changed. This is unacceptable. It is really sad that a law has to be implemented to keep people honest. In today's market many use the internet, images, and videos to do much, if not all, of their house hunting. Can you imagine living in NY and finding (what you thought) was your dream home in CA to get there and see something different than what you were expecting.
I was mainly curious if this law exists in other states.
Thanks for sharing.
Not sure about sky swaps but California signed a new law effective Jan 1 regarding real estate imaging for advertisement.
Article here from San Francisco Chronicle.
New California law means big changes for photos of homes in real estate listings
Article here from San Francisco Chronicle.
New California law means big changes for photos of homes in real estate listings
The AI hysteria is real and it won't be long before many more aspects of life will have similar laws regarding "AI-altered content." Editing software like Davinci Resolve will one day be called Davinci Resolve AI because there won't be anything about it that doesn't have something AI-related even if it's simple color grading so the laws (that won't keep up) would mean import a video into DR and it instantly qualifies.
I guess we have to go thru a phase until everyone is used to it and no one is "deceived" and then this goes away....until the next one. I feel like we've been thru this a couple of times already.
anotherlab
Well-Known Member
California's Assembly Bill No. 723 doesn't explicitly call out changes to the sky, but it doesn't exclude it either.
Real estate brokers & sales staff working on their behalf would need to add a disclosure that the picture had been altered, and if it's posted online, they would need to provide a link to the unaltered image. Edits like color correction and cropping would not require the disclosure.
IANAL, but if you use Lightroom to color grade the sky, that would probably be OK. If you replace the sky, then it would probably fall under the 723 rules.
skycam509
Well-Known Member
This is interesting. I'd never thought about it before. I use sky swaps all the time. With regard to skies, who's to say the sky didn't look like that on the day the photo was taken? I agree that altering permanent fixtures, colors etc. is crossing the line. But, what about adding saturation? The lawn wasn't really that green, but who's to say the camera didn't just make it look like that? I do some commercial property work for clients. I regularly take out garbage cans and dumpsters and other physically moveable eyesores, and sometimes even go so far as to remove the oil stains from parking spaces. That one might be crossing the line...?
On the other hand, what's ultimately the potential damage or wrongdoing? Isn't "buyer beware" still a thing? Is someone going to buy a house or commercial building sight-unseen based on a listing, or are they going to do their due diligence and at least go look at it first, if not have inspections, etc. I guess if their time driving to the property to look at it is worth anything, that could be considered damages.
I like the disclaimer idea. I'll definitely be using that going forward.
Thanks for sharing this.
EDIT: After posting this, I did some research and found this. These are a couple excerpts from the results of my search:
In Washington state, swapping out the sky in a real estate listing photo is a legally gray area that often borders on misleading advertising, depending on the extent of the alteration. While enhancing a dull sky is generally accepted as a common practice, completely replacing it or using overly dramatic, unrealistic skies can violate both Northwest Multiple Listing Service (NWMLS) rules and state fair housing/misrepresentation laws.
On the other hand, what's ultimately the potential damage or wrongdoing? Isn't "buyer beware" still a thing? Is someone going to buy a house or commercial building sight-unseen based on a listing, or are they going to do their due diligence and at least go look at it first, if not have inspections, etc. I guess if their time driving to the property to look at it is worth anything, that could be considered damages.
I like the disclaimer idea. I'll definitely be using that going forward.
Thanks for sharing this.
EDIT: After posting this, I did some research and found this. These are a couple excerpts from the results of my search:
In Washington state, swapping out the sky in a real estate listing photo is a legally gray area that often borders on misleading advertising, depending on the extent of the alteration. While enhancing a dull sky is generally accepted as a common practice, completely replacing it or using overly dramatic, unrealistic skies can violate both Northwest Multiple Listing Service (NWMLS) rules and state fair housing/misrepresentation laws.
- NWMLS Rules (The Legal Standard): The Northwest Multiple Listing Service (NWMLS), which governs most listings in Washington, prohibits manipulation that misrepresents the property. You cannot alter images to hide defects, such as replacing a gloomy, rainy day with a sunny one if the property is known for being in a consistently overcast area, as this violates the requirement for an accurate representation of the property.
Last edited:
To follow that logic, it wouldn't be OK to shoot the property on one of those sunny days if it's located in a consistently overcast area.
That's ridiculous.
anotherlab
Well-Known Member
If you shot a sunny sky, it's an accurate representation of the sky at the time you shot it. That would be OK. The gray area is when you replace the sky in post-processing.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
DJI Mini 5 Pro: Which Color Profile Should You Actually Use?
- Started by trisen1981
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Forum statistics
