I choose to make the client happy- which entails making their shacks look good. The shacks in question were small and extremely expensive. Again, different jobs entail different responsibilities. EIS photo-sims must be perfect. If they look like crap, so be it. The point of a photo-sim is to show exactly what it's going to look like, and if done correctly, it's bulletproof in court. The point of an interior rendering is not to be exact. It's to sell. It's to make something mundane look beautiful. Everyone in the marketing and advertising fields fakes the truth. How many product shots (photos, not renderings) of food have been retouched? All of them. How many magazine covers with beautiful women on them have been retouched (usually heavily) in Photoshop? All of them. If you were a photographer, would you tell your clients they are not allowed to fix up shots of cardboard-like burgers and fries. If you did, you would have zero clients very quickly. As a professional, my job is to make my clients' marketing pieces look as good as possible. For sure, if it was a photo of an interior instead of a rendering, some Photoshopper would do everything in his or her power to make it look bigger. Try telling your rendering clients "it will look exactly like it does in the real world, good or bad" and see how many you have left.