www.renderthat.com - what are your thoughts?

[NoodleLuff]

Just came across this site and was wondering about it....

 

My understanding is a client puts up a brief, and registered 3D artists compete by providing work and the top 3 are given a 'prize' but after the client has rights to everything the artist has created, including PSDs, and other working files.

 

Have I missed something? It seems like a bit of a bum deal for the artist, no?

 

What are your thoughts? Have any of you guys had experience with this site first hand or know somebody who has?!

 

Thanks...

[Devin Johnston]

It doesn't look great from the artist’s point of view, basically you create work for free unless you "win" at which time you receive a $400 prize if you’re doing an architectural rendering. The site says it's got thousands of artists just waiting to work on its competitions. It just seems like a bad way to create a talent pool, I can't imagine there are lots of people interested in working this way when the compensation is so small.

[Tommy L]

Ouch. What a scam. These clowns do the same thing:

http://www.crowdspring.com/

It makes me angry. Pretty much nothing makes me angry, but this does. De-valuing artists and designers in the name of 'crowd sourcing' is like throwing a bone to a pack of hungry dogs. Shameless.

[RyderSK]

There are hundreds of those crowd sites, each having unique flavour, each deserving to be frowned upon and ignored.

 

But people devalue themselves by using it, there should be no level of desperation when one should even consider such sort of "possible" income.

 

Sometimes I visit them for fun sakes with my brother, just to see those "I need a VIMEO site, but slightly different" (100perc. serious 1:1, I did not change anything to their brief) being offered "Yes, I can make that for 200 dollars" by 20 people...

 

 

The only difference here(renderhat) is that it's product of "Yeah, we should make some sort of retarded start-up, it's very trendy now" instead of grotesque market democratization.

[Francisco Penaloza]

Oh God hope no person that consider him self a Professional Arch Viz, will ever think on participate on something like this.

This is bad very bad, it is exactly what is killing Architectural business, the only difference that is not posted in one website only, but is the same scam. Pretty much will stay working using and abusing of low income countries that are starving for work, or it will create more sweat shops in India or Chine, Filipino or what ever there is talented people but can get a decent deal by them self.

If I am a hacker I will certainly put a good virus in that website.

 

it is funny when they say that the client know the final price, this is so wrong.

[Nic H]

i looked at the site but didn't see any pictures

real peasant stuff

[heni30]

It's weird but in a way that's what architectural competitions are. All these studios design something and they pick a winner. Of course the prize is huge monetarily and prestige-wise but for the runners up who put in all that time, money and effort, and came up short it must be de-moralizing.

 

However, the opportunity to compete and maybe have your unproven firm achieve instant recognition and additional commissions is definitely worth the risk (think of Lin and the Viet Nam memorial when she was a student).

 

In this case, though, these poor viz guys are just being exploited by sharks taking advantage of their naivete.

Edited May 8, 2014 by heni30

[patrickpack]

Hey,

 

I’m Patrick, Co-Founder of RenderThat.

 

A few weeks ago we decided to change the whole project system.

We are currently working on a staged project procedure, which will be a lot fairer from the the creatvies point of view and in the same way more efficient for the clients.

 

Here is a brief summary of the stages:

 

Stage 1

In the first stage the creatives are just asked to link a few projects right out of their portfolio, so that the clients can choose up to three creatives who meet their needs.

 

Stage 2

In the following stage the chosen creatives are asked to create a draft. Based on the submissions the client picks the creative whos draft convinced the most.

Creatives are paid for their work.

 

Stage 3

The creative who won the second stage is now asked to finish the project in direct collaboration with the client and/or with RenderThat.

Creative is paid for his/her work.

 

 

Please let me know what you think about it.

 

Greets,

Patrick

Edited May 8, 2014 by patrickpack

[heni30]

Hey Patrick - thanks for joining in.

 

This does seem a lot more equitable.

 

The only problem I see is in stage 2. Like who sets the standards for that?

Maybe someone who is eager to win will take his/her draft near to completion so

that it stands out and wins.

 

Who decides what the draft limits are so that they are all taken to the same level

of development?

 

Also - how do you charge? Is it based on the creative fee for the work?

What is the percentage charged? People will judge you on how fair it is.

 

80-20? 50-50?

 

Another issue is client choosing based on portfolio pieces. What if the piece took 3 months to do?

What if it was pirated from another site?

Edited May 8, 2014 by heni30

[Devin Johnston]

Hi Patrick

 

I also have a problem with stage 2, unless all 3 creative are being paid for their work I don't think it's equitable to ask them to do work for free. Instead why not have the creatives submit a proposal for the work the client want's done and let the client pick from them. I don't think the client should be setting the price for the work, in all honesty most clients do not know how much work goes into creating a rendering or animation and have no basis for judging how much something should cost.

 

I think you have the potential to create a great resource for both artists and clients however it has to benefit both and from what I see your site heavily favors the client. In most cases the artist is the one who gets the raw end of the deal when dealing with a client. Unrealistic deadlines, late payment, changing expectations are all problems artists have to deal with, the client has all the power. What we really need is an intermediary that can hold the client to their agreements and guarantee timely payment, in turn the client can have a larger talent pool to tap. Most of us would be willing to pay for a service that could facilitate this type of interaction, but it has to be fair.

[Tommy L]

Patrick,

Thanks for joining the conversation.

Your method does look improved, but it still seems flawed. I dont know if you are versed in the inner working of 3d rendering, I'd assume so.

Unlike the previous poster, I have no problem with the client setting the fee. Thats just working to a budget and the vendor has a choice of whether to accept the project. The budget (realistic or not) will dictate what standard of vendor will step forward for the project.

 

Stage 2 the 'draft' stage is problematic. Firstly, its kind of redundant as a decent 3d vendor should be able to show previous examples of work from their portfolio that would be more representative of their capability than a draft. Secondly, its in the nature of 3d artists to be both perfectionist and paranoid. The draft round encourages over zealous 3d guys to exhaust themselves for what is still essentially a competition. I think the draft phase will end up being the bulk of the production phase, with the 'winner' being the version that is honed to finish with client input.

 

I think your business model is maybe trying to bridge a gap that isnt there. If clients want to find a 3d vendor they only need skim through some sites like Coroflot and invite there preferred vendors to bid on a project.

 

But best of luck to you, after your site received a scathing reception here the easiet optiuon would have been to stay quiet, so I applaud you for joining in. I hope our feedback can be constructive.

[patrickpack]

Hey George,

Hey Devin,

 

Thanks for your reply!

 

Stage 2

In stage 2 each participating creative is paid for his draft.

The draft limits are set by the client or as the client uses our project consultancy, directly by RenderThat.

These limits interact with the payment in stage 2 - the higher the limits the higher the payment.

 

There will also be a costs estimation option for creatives in stage 2 so that the client can decide by drafts and by costs.

We tested this feature on a project a few days ago and it went really well (for both - client and creative).

 

 

Payment

RenderThat takes care of the whole payment interactions.

We transfer the prize money directly after the project ends.

 

 

Fees

The client is charged for starting a project and some project options (e.g. project consultancy).

This way there is only a minimum fee from the creatives in order to keep our server running, develop new features, acquire new clients and proper marketing.

We are currently negotiating with partners (e.g. Dosch, Sketchfab) to offer you discounts and benefits for your RenderThat projects.

 

 

We are well aware that there is a bunch of work to do but we stay tuned.

 

Greets,

Patrick

[NoodleLuff]

Aside from agreeing with all the other guys here, I have a question about the client getting to keep the PSDs and working files. First off I don't think should be part of any deal - the client shouldn't have the right to this unless it's specifically agreed or paid for.

 

Also, what happens if I do a render for a client using 3D models and cut out people I have purchased? By handing over the files am I not breaking my term of use? It seems unlawful and essentially the client is getting an image plus hundreds of pounds worth of assets I have bought or modelled for virtually nothing.

[CliveG]

..... they only need skim through some sites like Coroflot

 

Excellent website Tom, good for inspiration. Jeez there are some talented people out there! it's OT I know but do you have any more sites like that?

[Tommy L]

I think the general standard for arch-3d on Coroflot is fairly low, I just threw that out as an example of a portfolio website. But the sort of client that looking for talent in the same pool as a crowd-sourcing website is going to find exactly what they need there.

I think my main instinctual aversion to a crowd-sourcing solution is that I like the idea of local companies sourcing a local solution. Which is bizarre, I only have like 2 local clients. I even price lower for local, I just cant seem to pick em up. People have gotten used to the Wallmart mentality I guess.

[Rich O]

This whole concept leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[patrickpack]

I have a question about the client getting to keep the PSDs and working files. First off I don't think should be part of any deal - the client shouldn't have the right to this unless it's specifically agreed or paid for.

 

Hey Alain,

 

We will remove that one, so that the client can specify which files he needs in the project brief. But there will be no more general "get all the files" agreement.

 

Greets,

Patrick

[NoodleLuff]

Thanks Patrick - that's a good start.

 

Even if a fair price was agreed beforehand for the working files, I would also be cautious about what you promise from a legal standpoint.

 

You mentioned you were looking to build partnerships with Evermotion, Dosch, AXYZ, etc... I doubt they would take kindly to you condoning the illegal distribution of their products through the promise of the working file to the client. I am unsure of the legality surrounding this, but am pretty certain if I buy £100 worth of assets for a project, I can't just then include them in a file I am sending (essentially selling) to you - it's piracy.

 

In my experience, it's all about managing client expectations from the beginning, under promising and over delivering rather than the other way round. Say the client needs the model, perhaps that can be arranged for the right price, but it's worth informing them from the beginning that they will not get the 3D assets? This could be a model you adopt to cover yourself as well.

 

As Tom said, it would have been easy for you to stay quiet, I am glad you are getting involved and taking our comments on board.

 

Thanks

 

Alain

[Nils Norgren]

I would like to add that in my opinion this approach leads to the "commoditization" of the industry, when renderings get turned into a commodity, the artists will invariably suffer. In any creative field there is a cost for process, client management, creativity, experience, depth of bench for services, knowledge of client's motivation/needs.

 

A renderer should be considered a team member, with the same goals as the client, who understands the nuances of the task and brings the best effort to help the project succeed. When a client makes a decision based solely on an internet portfolio, there is no knowledge of how they work, how many reviews there will be, how much personalized interaction a client will get, their ability to understand the challenges the team faces, etc.

 

There are many examples of outstanding work on the internet, many times those works are created in non-production circumstances, they exhibit the ability a renderer has for producing good work, but that is only a part of what makes a renderer successful.

 

Anyone with much experience knows that when you compromise your process (to justify a smaller fee/profit) there is the strong urge to cut corners, then everyone becomes unhappy. Clients notice that the work they are getting is less than all the wonderful portfolio pieces they saw in a portfolio, renderers feel that the client is being overly demanding and expecting the Rolls Royce and paying for the used Honda.

 

After 22 years in this business I have seen many shifts in the industry, the rise of the small shop, outsourcing to China, India, South America, rebounding of traditional and NPR renders, the in-house render teams, built in rendering tools in CAD (many of you will remember the oft-claimed "Death" of the industry). All this change may lead to something like these types of business prospering, but I would be surprised if clients will feel successful after going through this process, and I suspect that renderers will also leave feeling less than great.

 

My humble 2¢

 

-Nils

[Scott Schroeder]

I think the only way sites like this can work is to agree to a fair wage (granted step #2 is what exactly does a fair wage mean for a global worker base) for everyone. When you have artists having a battle royal for a job that won't even pay the electric bill to turn on the computer, that's really bad for everyone involved. I'm not implying all jobs on the site are like that, but most of these crowd-tacular freelance sites are cesspools for that type of mentality.

 

If my coffee is fair trade, dagnabbit it, so should my render.

[edeonraind]

so. this is what i call a colossal cheek!

 

www.renderthat.com/contest/view-contest/Gebude-Wohnraumvisualisierung-High-Quality-fotorealistisch-10643.html

 

"...Please notice that we will need 7 Visualization alltogether: 1x Outside front view "day light" 1x Outside front view "night" 1x Outside back view "night" 1x Kitchen - Eating - Livingroom area from the middle house, groundfloor maisonette flat left side; the perspektive should include also the insidestairs and terrace 1x Kitchen - Eating - Livingroom area from the middle house, 2nd floor; the perspektive should include also the balcony 1x Kitchen - Eating - Livingroom area from the house on the right side, Ground floor; the perspektive should include also the terrace and garden 1x Bathroom from the middle house 1st floor flat on the right side, the view should go to the direction of the window All of them should be in "high quality" (foto realistic)!..."

 

"...

Prizes 1200€

#1 1000 €

#2 150 €

#3 50 €

..."

 

are you kidding me?!! seven rendering? for not even 1200€ ? some might call this a big swindle! ..

Edited June 22, 2014 by edeonraind

[fahdballaho]

amazing ; )

[Devin Johnston]

Ridiculous....absurd...inconceivable!!

[RyderSK]

1000/7= 143 euros per picture. Currently 46 submission, 7 users competeting, 3 days remaining, I guess that's final amount maybe.

 

So it's 14perc. chance, to 'win' 143 euros for your work. Amazing concept ! 5 stars.

 

 

Not even have such big problem with price, there's a market for everything, even grossly cheap, but, they will actually provide 100perc. of agreed work but having 14perc. chance to get paid ?! LOL what sort of retarded lottery is that. I feel bad for the people who take part, why..

Edited June 27, 2014 by RyderSK

[Nic H]

good deal, great clients, amazing site.