EddieLeon Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 The scenarios I've seen are set up with retainer pricing, guaranteeing them X number of hours per month. The client might pay a monthly fee for 6-12 months, but always have access when they need someone. The pricing and terms can be set in a Service Level Agreement which might guarantee exclusivity, but not work volume. The client can then engage the "on-site" artist or project manager with a simple one page Work Order Agreement. Simplicity and convenience for the client are key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 Rather than pay an anual £30,000 (UK) salary to an in house guy for half a dozen visuals, the company could outsource those 6 jobs for around £12,000. This makes perfect business sense, but don't forget that we don't have business courses in architecture school. Many architects will still want to retain full control of their designs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Denby Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 This makes perfect business sense, but don't forget that we don't have business courses in architecture school. Many architects will still want to retain full control of their designs... Not sure what you mean Eddie. I never have any control over the designs that I visualise...and if it's confidential, it remains confidential with me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 Not sure what you mean Eddie. I never have any control over the designs that I visualise...and if it's confidential, it remains confidential with me too. What I meant was that some Architects will want to maintain their in-house artists for convenience and control. They are not always concerned about the costs and overhead. I guess the control I'm referring to is the artistic aspects. Many architects complain that our work is too photoreal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tecton3d Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 regarding the design and architects' "control" ...having an artist embedded or on-site could help facilitate a very open and obviously direct channel of communication with said architect and actually enhance the way they represent their work which will ultimately render a greater value for them while strengthening the relationship between viz studio and design firm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan J Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 (edited) preliminary design phases. To the point of perhaps embedding (via contract) vis artist "X" into arch/design firm "Y" while still having the infrastructure of his mother company. I guess it could be described as almost a "temp" relationship ........QUOTE] (messed up) I realize your comment is noting a much more indepth and expansive arrangement, but isn't this what the freelancer was taking care of in the first place? Though I would agree having this set up would make a heck of a lot more sense than the traditional freelancer, especially when there is a main studio taking care of all the sales, marketing, productivity issue, and perhaps someone to call at a moments notice for assistance. Early on when I was working for an office furniture dealership, there was a company in Portland that outsourced space planners / move managers to large corporate, institutional and government agencies. It seemed to work well for a few years, but the clients began to absorb the contractors and started up internal departments to cut fees. The company went back to just providing the service as an external entity. The pendulem swings in both directions. As companies contract, this may be a great time to move forward with an outsourcing business model. Perhaps this is similar to a franchise model? Edited November 24, 2008 by Dan J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Gaushell Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Having on-site contractors sounds good in theory, but since most firms are relatively small and only create a limited number of presentation renderings per year, it seems to me to be a very small market segment.......certainly limited in the average size city. Young architects know enough about 3d to use it as a design tool and not all grunts will be cut back - got to have the guys to create the bathroom elevations! So a large number of firms will have limited 3d talent in house. With so many firms nervous, I doubt that many will be in the mood to take on a foreign concept - they will hire arch viz firms on an as needed basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Entesano Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 As the head of the presentation unit in a 100 person, um, make that 80 person arch firm, we are actually the busiest in the office. All marketing has steped up a notch to the point were we are producing high level images for nearly every punt job we do. Marketing books are produced and whizbang presentations. There are 4 arch vis guys and 2 graphic designers. We are the only area that hasnt had a 'trim'. Like many out there, a fair few of our clients have closed their books for a while. There are still big jobs out there and we have won a couple lately but being able to work with the designer next to you for an intense couple of days does give an edge I believe. Thanks to all those I met when I was over for the DMVC too, it really has helped lift our game over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 24, 2008 Author Share Posted November 24, 2008 ...being able to work with the designer next to you for an intense couple of days does give an edge I believe. Having artists at hand is definitely an advantage. There is also no question about the importance of 3d as being a competitive advantage in a tightening market. But, having a team of only 4 in-house artists can also be a disadvantage. You will need to be able to scale up somehow if the projects are too large or the deadlines are too tight. So, as Charles pointed out, "they will hire arch viz firms on an as needed basis." However, this can also have it's disadvantages if the right relationship with a reliable viz firm is not already in place. I do believe that an embedded "Super Freelancer" from a large viz firm might be a good solution (for the large arch firms). They will be immediately available, intimately aware of the firms projects and process, and have the backing of scalable 3d firepower... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 24, 2008 Author Share Posted November 24, 2008 Early on when I was working for an office furniture dealership, there was a company in Portland that outsourced space planners / move managers to large corporate, institutional and government agencies. It seemed to work well for a few years, but the clients began to absorb the contractors and started up internal departments to cut fees. The company went back to just providing the service as an external entity. The pendulem swings in both directions. As companies contract, this may be a great time to move forward with an outsourcing business model. Perhaps this is similar to a franchise model? The reason why the space planners were absorbed was because those same people provided the service. So, the companies/agencies just cut out the middle man. If what we are talking about is providing large scale 3d services to some arch firms, you wouldn't necessarily embed the artists. It would only need to be an account manager. This person would send the actual 3d work to the "mother company". Regarding franchise, I'm not sure if this idea is "franchiseable" because it would require centralized production and a very standardized process. The "franchisee" would actually only manage a small team for a specific client. Unless, maybe it's the Arch Firm that is the one franchising. This idea is uncharted territory so many things are possible. And I believe many firms will be open to these new ideas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 As the head of the presentation unit in a 100 person, um, make that 80 person arch firm, we are actually the busiest in the office. All marketing has steped up a notch to the point were we are producing high level images for nearly every punt job we do. Marketing books are produced and whizbang presentations. There are 4 arch vis guys and 2 graphic designers. We are the only area that hasnt had a 'trim'. Like many out there, a fair few of our clients have closed their books for a while. There are still big jobs out there and we have won a couple lately but being able to work with the designer next to you for an intense couple of days does give an edge I believe. Thanks to all those I met when I was over for the DMVC too, it really has helped lift our game over here. Hold on a minute, you work for an 80 person firm and you employee 4 full time arch viz people! My firm is 135 people with a satellite office and there are only two of us doing all the viz work. How do you keep 4 people busy in a firm that size, do you do full renderings and animations for every project and proposal that comes through the door? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) This situation COULD benifit SOME freelance viz people. Rather than pay an anual £30,000 (UK) salary to an in house guy for half a dozen visuals, the company could outsource those 6 jobs for around £12,000. BUT, would he outsource that work to the ex in house guy? Hmmmm? If a firm has an in house person, and that person is only creating half a dozen visuals a year then there is a problem. Regardless of whether that problems lies in the person being slow, or that firm not having enough work for a in house artist, there is still a problem. To be successful in a firm you need a 2.5 billable wage multiplier, or there so, but for the sake of my example, we will use a 2.5. Obviously the higher you can get above that, the better, and at the same time, most firms will let you go a little under without it being a problem. If you can get closer to a 3, then you are definitely turning a profit, but that can be tough with visualization. So, if an employee does 6 images a year, and pulls in a 30,000 pound salary, then each image this employee is creating needs to be billed at 12,500 pounds in order for the math to work. That is quite a bit of money per image. You say you can knock out those same 6 images for 12,000 pounds. That is 2,000 pounds an image, which is a more reasonable average number, at least more reasonable given that we don't have any real concept of what type of project this is. So, if we stick to the math of 2000 pounds per image, and a 2.5 billable multiplier, then this person needs to be creating 37 or 38 images a year to be profitable to the firm, not 6. Now, that is just math by the numbers given. It gets a little more complicated. The person is in house can have more value than just whether or not there salary equates to a certain number in a couple of different ways. They understand the project and project goals better because they are part of a team. This means that the amount of time an architect would need to spend gathering and communicating information to a sub contractor is greatly reduced. It also means that the lead designer has more access to the project, this can save time also. It is never good to go into a design presentation without having a clear idea of what the materials you are using to present are. Getting check offs from freelances can often be difficult, and take more time than deadlines may permit. I am guessing you can drop the mathematical calculation of 37 images above down to about 26 images if you want to try and factor in the worth of the above to paragraph into the equation. But anyway, I am obviously offering the view of an artist working inside of a firm. There are benefits and drawbacks to both. I realize that while the client often needs visualization that is more advanced than the average architect can provide, I am still a luxury item for firms when you look at the end of the year numbers. What I do is not necessary for the building to be built, but rather enhances the process that leads to the building being built. Hence a luxury item. edit: I just ran those numbers. 26 images a year is low. That is 1 image for every 10 working days. Not that great. I have been struggling a bit with how to figure out whether or not the service we provide within a firm is profitable. Now I have a base, and need to look back at the number of images we have produced over the past year. Edited November 24, 2008 by Crazy Homeless Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 24, 2008 Author Share Posted November 24, 2008 Based on your numbers, the salary of the artist would have be $34,000USD in order for the firm to be profitable. Just to be devil's advocate, you can get the same amount of renderings done in China for $15,000USD. You can subtract all the overhead of the US artist and be left with $90,000USD profit. Not bad, but clearly not the same design experience. My 2 cents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Denby Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 I wasn't suggesting that an architect would choose to employ an in-house viz guy to produce only 6 visuals a year. More that under the current economic situation an existing in-house guy's workload could drop to 6 visuals a year (from, maybe 30). It's at this point in time where the employer has to look at the numbers and make the choice of continuing to pay out £30,000 each year for the in-house guy, or £12,000 to a freelancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Homeless Guy Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 (edited) I wasn't suggesting that an architect would choose to employ an in-house viz guy to produce only 6 visuals a year. More that under the current economic situation an existing in-house guy's workload could drop to 6 visuals a year (from, maybe 30). It's at this point in time where the employer has to look at the numbers and make the choice of continuing to pay out £30,000 each year for the in-house guy, or £12,000 to a freelancer. Fair enough. I agree completely in this case, it is best that the architect develop a strong working relationship with a freelancer. It would be in the best interest for both of them. As of now our office has avoided most of the economic crunch. We have had a few projects get put on hold recently, so hopefully that is not the start of a trend for us. As of now, I still I have more work to do than I have hours in the day. Edited November 24, 2008 by Crazy Homeless Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Entesano Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Hold on a minute, you work for an 80 person firm and you employee 4 full time arch viz people! My firm is 135 people with a satellite office and there are only two of us doing all the viz work. How do you keep 4 people busy in a firm that size, do you do full renderings and animations for every project and proposal that comes through the door? Hi Devin, We seem to be keeping quite busy. Even a bit of Dubai work on the horizon. This week alone we need to produce about 16 images, about half of those to a marketing level. I think our value to the company primarily lies in the design phase at the moment. We do also model from the initial concept sketches though not as often these days due to the demand for images. Councils over here are getting lazy and require many images for submissions to go smoothly. We dont do many animations at the moment but if we do get a bit of time available I'm sure we will do more. The fact that we are a bit of a sausage factory makes us viable. A bit of a sellout sometimes but it is job security. I would work on and produce images for at least 20 different projects each year, most of which have a marketing budget allowed as a percentage. Another factor is that three of us are originally architecturally trained, and one is an interior designer by degree. Combined we have been doing arch vis solely as a job for over 40 years but having the arch background also makes us useful if work does dry up and we need to crossover into Development Application preparation or drafting, God forbid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dp Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 It's at this point in time where the employer has to look at the numbers and make the choice of continuing to pay out £30,000 each year for the in-house guy, or £12,000 to a freelancer. I left the in house situation 2003 because the salary in real term was falling behind and went full time freelance and until autum last year there were no issues as i was making 2-3-4 times what i'd have been making as a staffer although home life pretty much went west for a while. any positions now being advertised are still at circa £30,000 where an architects salary lept up to circa £50,000. We are now into intresting times. There are opputunities out there you simply need to keep both ears to the ground and be prepared to react quickly (and correctly) as they arise. My own gamble to downsize 3d business amd return to construction could not have been better timed in that sense and now i work overseas it has broadened the mind in every sense (tax free helps too). Unfortunatly it's supply and demand. those that make it through this will be lucky and/or resourceful. if you are a staffer there will be wage cuts, threats of job loss, longer hours more stress - generally you will be put upon and/or abused i made it through the last downturn in the early 90's and i won't get fooled again (no no!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Johnston Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 The fact that we are a bit of a sausage factory makes us viable. A bit of a sellout sometimes but it is job security. I would work on and produce images for at least 20 different projects each year, most of which have a marketing budget allowed as a percentage. That's crazy, well at leasy you have some job security. What kind of a render farm do you have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Entesano Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 That's crazy, well at leasy you have some job security. What kind of a render farm do you have? No render farm as such although I have commandeered some of the architects workstation in the past for that purpose, each of us have 64bit dual quad core xeons with lotsa ram and 30" monitors. As for good pay and respect we get both. I am also an associate director which is fairly uncommon in the old boys club of traditional architecture firms. Due to the fees we bring in we get compensated well and our salaries/bonuses are comparable to an experience project architect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Nelson Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 I sure picked a great time to go freelance again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieLeon Posted November 26, 2008 Author Share Posted November 26, 2008 Here's a grim article about some big firms in New York City: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081123/FREE/311239944/1009/newsletter02 I like this quote by Bradford Perkins of Perkins Eastman: “What I learned over the years is that you shoot your way out of the recession,” he says. “You've got to put a lot more emphasis on selling.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now