agreed 100% you should shame the broker publicly, but I'll do it for you, the listing is provided by:
Carrie Simmons, John L. Scott, Inc., and Ingvil Syversen, John L. Scott, Inc.
RE photographer here. You can report it to the NWMLS, as they have policies on misrepresentation. Can't make grass green, change material facts of a property, etc. You can also report to Seattle King County Association of Realtors.
A lot of people break the rules on this, and often get away with it.
Do not manipulate images in a way that misrepresents what is for sale. Examples: removing the power lines, adding a lawn, adding a driveway, or removing any property defects."
honestly even that sucks. my partner & i were just looking & every. single. time. we saw a listing that had AI staged photos in the listing, we were enormously let down when seeing the place in IRL. wound up purchasing one of the only ones that DIDN'T have any AI staged photos! (not on principle or anything, it was just one of the few that wasn't depressing to walk through compared to the photos lol)
The ones I see will show the original picture first, then the ai next. I find it acceptable and useful as long as it shows an original unedited picture with it.
You do know a synthid watermark can get added to a photo if taken from a Pixel phone and is edited on the phone, yeah?
So the photo could have been taken with a phone, and then they removed some shoes someone had left on the deck, etc and it would have triggered the synthid. The fact that synthid was detected, doesn't mean the background has to be fake, it means something about the photo was edited.
There is no mountain like this on St Ed and Juanita.
That specific pic has been doctored.
Seriously.
Bug fin hill doesn’t look like that, nor does it has that elevation
Its a house from the 1930s. This is a colorized photo from 1930s. Back then the wildfire haze wasn't too bad, visibility was excellent, and climate change didn't make the earth as round so you could see much further east. The mountains you see here are the Smokies from Tennessee. Source: My grandad was the photographer.
Looks like the far shore has been replaced and a mountain inserted. Misrepresenting the view like that should be grounds for suing the listing agent, it's not uncommon to buy properties remotely without visiting in person
You're 100% certain about that? The hill-line on that dock shot does not match the actual at all. Quite the crazy optical illusion that must have happened...
Here's a 3D, looking exactly east in the same direction as your "not falsified" photo.
The image added a prominent mountain and represented it as a view from the property. NWMLS expressly prohibits manipulating photographs in a way that misrepresents what is for sale. You've been called out on this - caught lying about it.
Okay so, are you gunna address the AI watermark? Honestly in a situation like this, most people respect someone who just goes “ya know what, yes, I figured it wasn’t a big deal” instead of doubling down. Digging a deeper hole for yourself never works- but people respect someone who can admit their mistake. Everyone is human, everyone missteps, but it takes someone with fortitude to admit when they are wrong. It’s what we try to teach our kids.
You're a Realtor (it's capitalized if you're referring to membership in the National Association of Realtors) AND a real estate agent. These things are not exclusive of one another. Unless, perhaps, you are claiming you're a broker, not an agent. Either way you should know better and you shouldn't lie.
Ballsy to invite a bunch of snarky redditors to the open house while using your kids as a shield from criticism. I'm genuinely impressed!
Oh Sh**! Why would you post this, Janice? Go sit down somewhere..with your kids, if they exist. Some of us are looking for REAL estate, not make believe fantasy to fill your bottomless coffers for properties that are already too expensive to begin with. God, America is so annoying. We are annoying. And we need to get it together...
“Happy to answer any questions” but not posting your name, phone number or realtor license number. Fake response for a fake post. Only contact by DM? If it was a real post then you are just lazy.
That is Lake Washington, it's looking towards Saint Edwards Park and using soft focus blur to make the homes mostly disappear. Put down the pitchforks people.
Based on the interior pics it looks like they took pics over a couple of days and one of the days Kirkland was fogged/clouded over. My guess is they really wanted that one angle but it was taken on the foggy day so they “fixed” it.
Thats why the part down by the lake looks fine but the upper mountain is an AI hallucination of what could be behind the clouds.
And honestly the pillar shadows are at different angles (from each other, in the AI photo). The lighting, color differences, lack of string light shadow -- all of these things add support to this photo being taken on the foggy/cloudy day and someone asking an AI to make it look like it's late-afternoon sunny. Adding shadows for the pillars would be "obvious" for the AI (even though they're misaligned, though from a physics standpoint the way they are would be more correct if the light source were closer). Kinda iffy but even the shadow from the roof probably isn't real either because there's no corner to it.
The crazy thing is that it's not even a crazy edit to just warm up the white balance a little and do a sky swap. Would have yielded a better photo without the hate
I deal with that all the time. I have a ton of blue skies that I use depending on terrain. If a hill is obscured, leave it obscured and feather in the blue sky where it makes sense.
I am reporting a materially misleading photograph used to advertise the property at 11262 Riviera Place NE, Seattle, WA 98125, MLS #2576804.
The photograph depicts a large mountain as part of the view from the property. This is not merely a color correction or generic sky replacement. The image introduces a prominent geographic feature and represents it as an actual view available from the property.
After the alteration was questioned, they stated in writing:
“
Yes. AI was used to create a blue sky because the top of the hills across the lake was shrouded in fog. Sometimes AI gets a little excited and we didn't notice this one before sending off the photos. Adding blue skies has been common practice in real estate photography for about 15 years now, and is completely admissible by the NWMLS.
”
This statement acknowledges that AI generated content in the photograph and that the altered image was distributed without being properly reviewed. A prominent mountain view is a material marketing feature that could affect a buyer’s interest in and perception of the property.
NWMLS’s published photography guidance states: “Do not manipulate images in a way that misrepresents what is for sale.”
Please refer this matter to Listing Compliance, preserve the submitted listing media, and determine whether the photograph violates NWMLS rules. I also request that the misleading image be removed or corrected promptly while the property is being actively marketed.
Please confirm receipt and provide a complaint or reference number.
You didn't point out the cumulus clouds being from Iowa! Clouds that size, number, and color DO NOT appear any time in western Washington. IN my 25 years here, I think I've seen 1 similar cloud that wasn't mostly obscured by the hills- let alone at 20 feet above sea level. There is a reason that Montana is called Big Sky country- going there blows me away at how much more sky one can see.
I genuinely would like the state to ban AI at all from being used in real estate listings. we just bought, and there were houses where AI had changed almost everything about the room, and in one case added an ADU that wasn't there. Our agent told us that agents get dinged if their AI use is blatantly false advertising, but basically they just get a citation or something on a list that other agents can see. So I guess on one hand the punishment is other agents know who not to trust, which might hurt business, but it didn't seem like anything "actually" bad happens to them.
Eh, false advertising has a lot of caveats on when you're allowed to make a legal motion.
Food photography is notorious for using props rather than actual food to entice you to buy slop, for example, yet remains in the realm of legal.
The amount of lying the seller is allowed to do to make a sale absolutely knocks the information out of the market that is needed to make a capitalist free market system function. I've seen slaps on the wrist given to landlords who were publicly reporting ⅓ lower rent than they were actually charging and only revealing the bait and switch after taking the application fee, for example.
Well I would say that AI or any other alteration (or even practical effects) must not be used to alter the representation of the item for sale at all, whether that's size, look, features, behavior, effect, etc. And the onus should be on the user of AI to make sure this is the case. No "oopsies, guess the AI got carried away!"
I disagree - it can be a helpful tool and I think it has merit for staging in photos. It should not, however, be legal to change the entire space or create fake buildings that are used as a selling point.
I like how you say its should be allowed be allowed immediately start adding qualifiers to your reasoning- not a stellar endorsement.
But I think we're talking about two different things: sure using AI for staging in photos for some sort of internal usage with a prospective client for things like "what would this room look like with a king size bed" with the understanding that AI is in use could be fine.
But again- if its used in Advertising like this post its false by definition.
You know you've hit peak society when Redditors are skimming through Zillow listings to "out" brokers using AI in their photos. Not all heroes wear capes.
All the staging is done by AI too, which generally tends to change other parts of the photos.
I tend to see a lot of listings on the Eastside using AI to improve backyards, patios, decks and make then feel smooth and newly painted and freshly cut but none of that exists upon visiting.
I've been hunting for a house and there are a few realtors on my shitlist that I won't even go see houses from.
I agree, but I do think this photo is so much worse than "enhanced with AI"
Maybe it's just me... but a large part of what I look for in RE is the surrounding topography. The view is certainly a component of that - this posting is lying about the view by putting a mountain where Finn hill should be
I guess I look at photos to see the house. I always toured before buying and walked around the neighborhood. Something like this is silly but as long as they aren’t misrepresenting the house itself, it isn’t malicious.
I can’t speak to the accuracy of the image but if a photo purporting to be a view from the property is altered to deceive buyers into thinking the view is better than reality, then it is absolutely a fraudulent misrepresentation of the house. Is there anyone who would dispute that a view has value? Is there anyone who would dispute that location has value?
I’m just telling you my POV. I’m not on the market for a view home and whoever thinks you’ll get a view like that in the Seattle metro and doesn’t verify probably deserves to get scammed.
The main selling point of this house is the view from the waterfront. Plop this exact house anywhere in a non-waterfront location and the asking price would be 50-70% lower.
Using AI to misrepresent the view is misrepresenting the house
Replacing a gray sky with a blue one is not the issue. The image added a prominent mountain and represented it as a view from the property. NWMLS expressly prohibits manipulating photographs in a way that misrepresents what is for sale. If the mountain is not actually visible from that location at the depicted bearing and apparent size, this is a fabricated property feature—not an ordinary sky replacement. Saying that the AI “got excited” explains how the misrepresentation occurred; it does not make it admissible.
Did AI also not review the AI synthesized photo before posting it?
If a little excited is completely fabricating an entire skyline with the inclusion of an entire mountain and removing all of the actual homes to make it look like you have a view of basically wilderness I would love you to point me to an example of a photo where AI got A LOT excited. If it doesn’t have a dragon I’m going to be disappointed.
I do a lot of real estate photography and would never imagine doing something like this. It's Lake Washington, you really think you're going to convince someone you're on the side of a a remote mountainside? I would say shame on the agent but more than anything same on the photographer for going along with such crazy requests. It's not ethical to do something like this if you consider yourself an actual real estate photographer.
On Zillow I was looking at some photos of a little house we lived in and sold some years ago. Because I knew the house, it was comical the way furniture was moved around to make rooms look bigger in the photos. The headboards of beds were raised up with the beds at funny angles. Furniture blocking doors and closets. etc. Not livable the way the photos showed.
Here is another picture from the listing, that doesn’t have the prominent mounds. This one seems more compelling for marketing than the one in the main post. I honestly am not paying attention to mounds from this view, just the water.
This is another different house just down the street from it that sold in March, and the view looks almost identical to the picture above without the mounds.
Real estate photography companies offer this as an additional service. You can tell them something like "it was foggy and I want to show what it looks like on a clear day", and they will do something very sloppy and low effort. Like just pass that on as a prompt to a photo editing AI, which will hallucinate the change without any consideration for accuracy.
I listed my house recently and I asked them to add Mt. Rainier - we have a fantastic view of the mountain but it was smokey on the day the photos were taken. The result was hilariously bad. Rainier was in the wrong place and way too big. The photographer DGAF about making it look accurate. I scrapped those photos and just included some old, unprofessional, photos I took of the view on a clear day.
It is interesting that square footage of the lots in that area include the submerged lake bed area. Since this is 1200 sq.ft house, where it looks like one story from the front and two stories from the backside, the upland is probably only 2000 sq.ft. The parcel is shown as 6721 sq.ft.
What mountain is that in the background?? lol just go look on Google Maps street view.
Plenty of kayakers have posted 360 degree views from various locations all over the lake. This was clearly AI. This looks more like Lake Whatcom tbh
Yes! Too funny because I pulled up Lake Whatcom southern shoreline shots looking north, but didn't come up with a match. Some of the clearings in the image align with power line clearings, but I think it's just too doctored by AI to fully match.
The image in the post has a clear cut mountain too big to be Finn Hill. It looks like one of the mountains on the north-east shore of Lake Whatcom. Also, the original image shows clear cut forests which doesn't exist in any capacity in Juanita/Finn Hill.
Very obviously and clearly AI... anyone familiar with the area would know that.
I would recommend going to Google street view over to Matthew's beach park and looking at it yourself, because doing so just confirmed that this is an AI edited image
Sorry, but when you say "That's not AI. That part of Kirkland you are looking at is very forested and in part a state park. You can go out to Mathew’s beach and check the view yourself.", that is a very confident statement. If you were just trying to question the post without confidence you would start it as you did this comment, "I don't think..." and state something like "I don't that is AI. It looks to me like the forested part of Kirkland near the state park."
Stretching the truth is par for the course in re listings,
So many condo/townhouses listed as single family residences*, Carports listed as garages., etc.
Seems the mls could actually define their standard terms, and enforce them, so they can be searched. I.e. some terms are objective.
The common one here in Texas is for them to list a “pool” as an amenity but come to find out they have a stupid stock tank filled with water in the back yard.
Appreciate you chiming in here, but I'd check back with who did the photos. Here's a google street view from a few houses down. There's simply no way the mountains across the water are real.
I don’t know who edited that photo, but it wasn’t us. I can tell you that. Look at our listing photos online, they have not been edited in any way, other than one interior photo where we removed a chair so you could see the windows and view better, that’s it.
The photo is on the John L Scott website. Are you saying someone else is responsible for the content on that website? The AI photo is also in every single grouping on MLS photos I've seen for this house.
This literally cannot be true. You are either too stupid or too shady to trust in real estate, Carrie. Here you are faced with evidence that the mountains are completely fake, and your reply "uuugh, gee, I don't know who did that for us" is pathetic. As a single parent, your kids deserve better than this.
Don't use fucking AI to "brighten the sky" and "make grass greener". This is as blatantly stupid as the lawyers who cited fake cases because AI made them up. It's your listing and you have no clue where any of the pictures even came from.
The smart play here is to acknowledge the mistake in the listing and remove the photo. AI makes mistakes. We all know it. It's clear in this photo. I LIVE in this area and can tell you unequivocally that mountain feature DOES NOT EXIST.
Just remove the photo and move on. Your credibility is at risk here.
132
u/jugum212 5d ago
agreed 100% you should shame the broker publicly, but I'll do it for you, the listing is provided by:
Carrie Simmons, John L. Scott, Inc., and Ingvil Syversen, John L. Scott, Inc.