Future of In-House Vizualizers

[carlotristan3d]

http://archrecord.construction.com/practice/business/1008practice.asp

Hi guys,

Just came across this article at Archrecord, an arch firm is relating what measures they made to become more profitable. Downsizing was one, and guess who was one of the first to go? Yup, the in-house visualizer.

[M V]

I think that firm will really regret that at some point. They might not see the value in having an in-house illustrator right now, but when they need to submit for a competition, proposal, or wow a client, they are going to be giving that person a call. I guarantee it. I think there is no better time to be an in-house illustrator than now. Firms can't afford to hire the pro rendering firms and I think arch firms are doing more proposal work then they ever have before and most times the graphics win the job.

 

The one thing you can do to prevent this is to wear more than the "rendering guy" hat. if you can make a well composed render, then you have a good eye for design and there's a very good chance that you know AutoCAD or Revit, so thats a very valuable thing in regards to production work. We have to do a little bit of everything to fill the gaps when there isn't rendering work. If a firm can get a lot of bang for their buck, they will think twice about letting you go.

[Jonathan Sanchez]

I think Valero is right. If you are a good 3d Artist, and you also know how to draft 2d plans, then I think as a greater value to the company, your future is fine.

[M V]

Just like architects are redefining their scope of services to survive in the current state of things, I think we will too. When BIM comes online full force, there's a lot of opportunities there for someone highly skilled in 3D. I hear a lot of talk about the fear of Revit and how it's going to steal our business. I say, if you can't beat em, join em.

[Stan Zaslavsky]

i think another issue is - in australia typically architects are service providers specialising in design and visualisation is secondary. the purpose behind the visualisations here and i'm guessing around the world is to sell the product that the archtiects have designed - ie what the builders are going to build.

so IMHO we are specialists in helping clients to market their products rather than design ... so in some way what we do is in a totally separate stream of activity to what the architects are doing

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

If you are only billing 50-60% of your time, then it shouldn't come as a surprise that you are let go. Hopefully they saw it coming, and were looking ahead to their next step.

 

I also wonder what level experience the in house guys had...... the type of images they were doing, and how far the were carried out in telling a complete story. This may just be for my own curiosity though.

Edited September 13, 2010 by Crazy Homeless Guy

[wasteland giant]

Now we are getting renderings from China

I read that issue of that particular arch record.

 

Can't beat the legions of render slaves who work @ $2.50 an hour... really.

 

but what else is new.

 

 

 

my hourly rate calc is based on the foxconn factory workers.

http://rosamundwo.com/5411/11th-suicide-at-apple-factory/

 

$132/week

$50+ hours.

Edited September 13, 2010 by wasteland giant

[Justin Hunt]

There are alot of factors involved when it comes to downsizing, not just the fact you are an in-house 3d visualizer.

 

3D departments still have a rather large overhead for many archictect firms, along with that its not a primary source of direct income, many firms see it as an easy target when downsizing.

 

However those firms who have sucessufully incorporated 3D into the design process see great value in it. Design times are reduced, its possible to explore more design options, etc. Time scales and resources are geared towards the design process, so often of you get too tied up in the fine picture ,as whats nessesary in studio, it will cause profits to go down and the target on your back to grow bigger. In-house is big picture, broad brush, get the intent right and everything else is cream on top, type work. Often a simple block model is all that is needed to communicate the design intent and get on the right track much quicker. Marketing images and animations are a by-product and if a profit is made from it (although its not always possible) then its a welcome bonus.

 

In-house is a very different beast to studio.

[Derek Entesano]

Interesting. There are four of us in my unit doing the vis work and we were the only area that didnt get a cut when things went pear shaped two years ago. We are seen as vital in helping to punt and secure new work as well as offer extra services to the client. You are right about diversification as well. Lift your skills high enough and be useful in as many ways as you can and you shouldnt need to worry about being on the chopping block. Speed is definitely a key as is integrating into the workflow as seamlessly as possible. Even though the architects could produce an image out of their CAD package, it will take them longer and will not look as good as yours! If it does then maybe it is time for reassessing...

[M V]

I bet that firm realized that they made a huge mistake making all those cuts. Sure it looked great on paper, but the reality is they went from 45 to 15??? There's no way they are doing the same level or quality of work they were before. And if the 15 left behind are picking up the slack of those 30 they laid off, then they will get some resignation notices for sure.

[Devin Johnston]

There has to be a minimum amount of work to justify an in house Viz guy, this company lost 65% of it's workforce and their business model probably changed drastically as well. It doesn't surprise me that they got rid of him because they were about to close their doors otherwise and couldn't justify the expense. In the long run once business picks up I'll bet they dump China and hire someone else, there are just too many benifits in having someone in house.

[AJLynn]

Outsourcing outside the country isn't best for a lot of firms, but what they're talking about is going from 45 during the building boom to 15 during the current slump. I know firms that have had that kind of staff loss but in a less planned way and made huge mistakes like downsizing the marketing staff - those are the guys who are particularly screwed.

[FlytE]

I think Valero is right. If you are a good 3d Artist, and you also know how to draft 2d plans, then I think as a greater value to the company, your future is fine.

 

Actually I wouldnt take that for granted. I have unfortunately been in a situation where, despite the fact I had an honours degree in Architecture and 7+ years of high level visualisation experience, I was made redundant through lack of work. If that wasnt bad enough, I was made rendunant over a qualificationless trainee who just so happened to be good friends with the managing director. I have absolutely no bad feelings towards the trainee (who by the way, was a trainee in so much as he was being trained in visualisation by me), but it opened my eyes to the fact that at the end of the day it all comes down to money and in business terms he was less expensive than me. Still stings to this day though lol.

 

I do not think if you do cad drafting then you are more likely to be kept on. Instead I recon they would get a technician in who can actually detail construction and build buildings at a cheaper rate because you are probably alot more valuable to them as a visualiser than as a technician. If you want my advice, always be the absolute fricking best visualiser you can be and they might actually think they are losing a valuable current and future asset by getting rid of you. Then if they do, you make it THEIR loss.

[Stan Zaslavsky]

totally agree with andy ... all we can do is control and improve our own abilities - the business world if we are employed is to a large degree outside of our control.

another option is to become a consultant to the arch company - maintain or increase your own salary level, but ina way become cheaper to the company (they don't have to pay super annuation, work cover or any other insurance/taxes to keep you as a salaried staff member).

anyway all in all - if you really are excellent at what you do and work hard - there will always be a place of employment whether at the same co or somewhere else

[Iain Denby]

I agree with FlytE. It's down to money when their backs are against the wall. Lots of 'top' people are being made redundant at the moment.