What day-to-dusk actually changes
A day-to-dusk edit replaces the sky, lowers the ambient exposure to match the hour, and, where you ask for it, adds a warm glow to windows that already show interior detail. It does not touch the building, the landscaping, the driveway or the neighbours.
That distinction is the whole game. The alterations that get agents into trouble are the ones that change what is being sold: paint colour, flooring, permanent fixtures, a removed utility pole, a tidied garden, a concealed defect. Those are prohibited in several markets whether or not you disclose them.
Why the framing matters more than the sky
Generative image editors are documented to expand the field of view, over-generate into masked areas, and shift colour systematically. A peer-reviewed evaluation across fourteen tasks and forty datasets found exactly this: these models prioritise semantic plausibility over strict pixel alignment. Vendor claims that they preserve architecture are folklore.
So we do not trust the output. Every render is compared against your original, structure first, because a relight changes every pixel's colour on purpose but must not move a single roofline. Renders that drift are thrown away before you see them, and you are shown the log of what failed.
The part nobody ships
A study of roughly 40,000 listing images in early 2026 found 10.8% digitally altered, and more than 90% of those carrying no disclosure at all. That is a workflow problem rather than an integrity problem: photographers deliver JPEGs, and a JPEG carries no record that anything changed.
What comes back from us is a pair: the altered image and the unaltered original, ordered so the original can sit immediately before or after the edit as Canopy and SDMLS require, plus the disclosure text for each surface you publish to, and an audit record with both file hashes.