Sellers obsess over keywords, ad bids, and pricing. Buyers obsess over one thing: "Will this product actually be what I think it is?" The gap between those two questions is where most listings lose the sale — or earn the return. This report pulls together what shoppers across multiple 2024–2026 surveys say they wish listings showed, and what they say they returned products over. The pattern is consistent enough that it should change how you brief your photographer and your copywriter.
The headline number: 78% of shoppers want more images
Across recent surveys, the single loudest message from buyers is "show me more." Specifically:
| What buyers say | Share | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Want more images on product pages | 78% | Nfinite, State of the Shopper |
| Abandoned a product page because there wasn't enough info or detail | 69% | Nfinite |
| Said images/videos were the #1 factor in their purchase decision | 61% | Nfinite |
| Returned a product because it didn't match how it was presented online | ~50% | Nfinite |
| Said multiple-angle photos lifted their conversion | 58% avg sales boost | MDG Advertising |
The expectation is concrete: shoppers expect about six images and three videos per product on Amazon or comparable retailers. Most listings fall short of that, and the gap directly translates to abandoned carts and returns.
What shoppers actually want to see (ranked)
Compiling free-text answers from buyer surveys (PowerReviews, eMarketer, Nfinite, BigCommerce), the requests cluster into five categories. We've ordered them by frequency mentioned in survey responses about "wish I'd seen before buying" and post-return interviews.
Rank 1 — True color rendering
The complaint cited most often after a return is "the color was different." This is rarely about retouching dishonesty. It's about three preventable problems:
- Mixed light sources during shoot (window light + warm bulb = inconsistent color temperature)
- No white balance reference in the shoot (no gray card, no neutral target)
- Single-image color when the product comes in variants — buyers see one swatch and assume the rest will look identical on screen
What buyers want: a swatch grid showing every color variant photographed under the same lighting, plus one shot near a known reference (like skin tone for apparel) so they can calibrate against their own monitor.
Rank 2 — Real-world scale
The second most common return reason — and the highest in furniture, home, and accessories — is "bigger/smaller than I expected." Shoppers complain that they:
- Cannot translate a "32 inches wide" measurement into a mental picture
- Cannot tell whether a bag will fit a 13-inch laptop
- Cannot tell how a piece of furniture occupies a real room
What buyers want, in order of effectiveness:
| Method | What it answers | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| Annotated dimension overlays on the product | "How big is each part?" | Low |
| Common-object reference (coin, hand, water bottle) | "How big is it relative to something I own?" | Low |
| In-room or on-body context | "How big is it where I'll use it?" | Medium |
| Before/after comparison with the previous version | "How big vs. the model it replaced?" | Medium |
A bag listing that shows the bag, then the bag with a 13-inch laptop inside, then the bag worn by a 5'6" person, answers the size question three different ways. One image rarely does.
Rank 3 — Material, texture, and weight
This is the sense buyers can't simulate online, and it's where listings systematically underdeliver. Buyers want:
- Macro shots of fabric weave, leather grain, ceramic glaze, plastic finish
- A weight number (in grams or ounces, not "lightweight")
- A "feels like" comparison ("similar weight to a paperback book")
- Stretch tests for apparel — a hand pulling the fabric to show give
- Folding/draping tests for soft goods
Apparel returns where the buyer says "the material wasn't what I expected" account for a substantial slice of the 25%+ fashion return rate. A 1-second close-up macro of the weave does more to set expectations than three paragraphs of marketing copy.
Rank 4 — What's actually in the box
Sellers assume this is obvious. Buyers don't. The "what's included" complaint shows up across categories — small electronics, kitchen tools, beauty kits, anything with components. Specific gripes:
- "Picture showed the kit, I assumed all of it was included" (it wasn't)
- "Nowhere did it say batteries weren't included"
- "The accessory in the lifestyle shot was sold separately"
What buyers want: one image — usually image 5 or 6 in the stack — that is just the contents laid out on a flat background, every accessory labeled, with a clear note about what is or isn't included.
Rank 5 — Use in context
Buyers want to see the product being used, not just sitting on a white background. This is the lowest-ranked request because shoppers know it costs money to produce — but the conversion lift is real. eMarketer found 60% of consumers said a lifestyle image was more likely to capture their attention than a packshot, and pages combining packshots with lifestyle photos lift conversions 15–30%.
What "in use" looks like by category:
| Category | "In use" shot |
|---|---|
| Apparel | On a model with stated height/size |
| Kitchen tools | In a hand, mid-action, with food |
| Furniture | In a room with other furniture for scale |
| Electronics | On the desk it'll live on, plugged in, with cable management visible |
| Skincare | On skin, with finger pressure showing texture |
What "wish I'd seen" tells you that "why I returned" doesn't
Returns data tells you the product disappointed someone enough to ship it back. Pre-purchase abandonment data — what shoppers wish they'd seen before they left — is bigger and more actionable. Most shoppers who don't see what they need simply leave silently. They don't email you. They don't review you. They just become someone else's customer.
When 69% of shoppers cite "not enough information" as their reason for abandoning, and only ~70% of carts are abandoned overall, the math implies that information gaps account for a significant share of every dollar of e-commerce demand that doesn't convert.
The information completeness checklist
Run any product listing against this checklist. If you can't tick at least 9 of 12 boxes, the listing has a buyer-information gap.
Color / appearance
[ ] Color shown under neutral lighting (no warm/cool cast)
[ ] All variants photographed under identical lighting
[ ] At least one image with a known color reference
Size / scale
[ ] Numeric dimensions stated in both inches and centimeters
[ ] At least one image with annotated dimensions or scale reference
[ ] Product shown in context (worn, in-room, in-hand)
Material / texture
[ ] Macro close-up of primary surface
[ ] Numeric weight stated
[ ] If apparel: stretch / drape demonstrated
Contents / scope
[ ] Flat-lay image showing every included item
[ ] Explicit text list of what is and isn't included
Function
[ ] Product shown being used by a person, not just sitting still
Cost of getting this wrong
Returns aren't free. Across categories the average cost to process a single e-commerce return runs $10–$65 depending on the product (eightx, Average eCommerce Return Rate by Category 2026). The breakdown:
| Cost component | Range |
|---|---|
| Reverse logistics | $5–15 |
| Processing labor | $8–15 |
| Restocking | $2–10 |
| Potential write-off | up to product margin |
For furniture, where the return rate runs 22.7%, reverse logistics on a single sofa often exceeds the unit margin. Closing the buyer-information gap is one of the few cost reductions that pays back in both higher conversion and lower return rate at the same time.
Return rate by category — the spread
Buyer-information gaps cost different categories different amounts. The 2026 averages:
| Category | Return rate |
|---|---|
| Shoes | 31.4% |
| Fast fashion | 28.9% |
| Women's fashion | 27.8% |
| Furniture | 22.7% |
| Home goods | 19% |
| Beauty | 12% |
| Food & beverage | 12% |
| Electronics | 11% |
| Pet products | 10% |
| Supplements | 7% |
Categories at the top of this list are also the ones where buyer surveys cite the largest information gap — exactly the pattern you'd expect.
FAQ
How many images should a product listing have?
Six is the floor for most categories, eight to ten is the ceiling before diminishing returns set in. Listings with more than five images convert ~50% better than single-image alternatives (Nfinite). Above ten, additional images don't reliably move conversion — the time would be better spent on a video.
Are videos worth the effort?
Yes — product videos increase purchase likelihood by 73% on average (Wyzowl, Video Marketing Statistics). A 15–30 second clip showing the product in use answers questions images can't, particularly for apparel (drape, movement) and electronics (interface, button feel).
Will adding more honest information actually reduce returns?
The data is consistent: yes. Nordstrom's high-resolution 360-degree product views reduced returns by 18% within two quarters. Brands adding macro shots and dimension annotations report return-rate drops in the 15–25% range. The mechanism is simple — fewer surprises after delivery means fewer "this isn't what I expected" returns.
What's the cheapest improvement I can make right now?
Add a flat-lay "what's included" image to any listing where the product comes with multiple parts or accessories. It's one extra shot and prevents the "I thought X was included" complaint that drives a measurable portion of returns and one-star reviews.
How do I know if my listing has an information gap without running a survey?
Read the one-star and three-star reviews on your existing listing and your top three competitors. Group the complaints by the five categories above. Whichever category has the most complaints is the one missing from your listing's image stack.
Sources & References
- Nfinite — State of the Shopper: visuals are everything
- eMarketer — What do consumers expect from product pages?
- PowerReviews — How visual UGC became fundamental to e-commerce
- eightx — Average eCommerce Return Rate by Category (2026)
- Ringly — 42 e-commerce return statistics you need to know in 2026
- Blendnow — Do better product photos really increase sales?
- Thedotstore — Product Photography: Its Impact on Ecommerce Growth