the architectural "milieu" being such a conventional one, firms do not accept people who took different ways to get to the same point and cg is definitely one such way - it is regarded as a full-time occupation that has nothing to do with design ( even if your education will allways be an asset);B]
the architectural "milieu" being such a conventional one, firms do not accept people who took different ways to get to the same point and cg is definitely one such way - it is regarded as a full-time occupation that has nothing to do with design ( even if your education will allways be an asset);
Couldn't agree with you more. CG visualization is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it's nice to have the ability to do CG, but just don't get stuck doing it if your desire is to be an architect. Here's the problem, the more time you spend at the office doing CG, the less time you have to learn all the necessary skills to be a better designer, detailer, team player, project manager, etc. etc. Not to mention $$$
I had an interesting conversation with my former boss a few years ago to see if I could spend more time doing 'architectural' work (SD, DD, CD, & CA) instead of being stuck in pre-design and being the dedicated office rendering machine.
The response was as follows:
"Back in the day, people with prisma colors had this problem. I am not sure what to tell you but that we will try to get you more involved."
I agree with alexandre, if you enjoy doing 'renderings', freelance is a great way to supplement your salary. When starting out as a young architect, it's too tempting for the principal in charge to pass up on the chance to get cheap renderings at your time.
Squid