why do we post our images (here and there) ?

[peterhoste]

What it says in the title: why do you post your images in the first page gallery (or on evermotion or Ronenbekerman) ?

 

I've just posted a few images but i asked myself why did i do this, what's the purpose of doing this ?

For the jobs ? My clients (Architects, Developers etc...) never visit to these CG sites.

I don't even know if i want any discussion about the images, the work is finished the client is happy...so why bother any discussion about it.

Maybe we do it for the fame and get the thumbs up from someone on the other side of the globe, hmmm….

So why do you post your work here (and there)?

[RyderSK]

I'll write you quite an essay on this once I finish job tomorrow !

 

Edit: I like those bridge images by the way, saw them somewhere already ;- )

Edited May 14, 2014 by RyderSK

[heni30]

The main reason I think is to exchange ideas and inspiration with our peers.

 

The first photography class I took at art school, the teacher came in and said - take a picture of a tree and bring it in tomorrow.

 

We all thought - well that's kinda dumb - but just went ahead and did it thinking there'd be a bunch of pictures that were all kinda the same.

 

The extreme difference in all the pictures was astonishing - The differences in lighting, in tonality, in scale, in mood, in psychological feel, etc.

 

We can learn a LOT from looking at each other's work - mostly seeing how people approach things differently, their different sensibilities, how their minds work. It's the best education there is.

Edited May 14, 2014 by heni30

[marius e]

Well its rather obvious why....its a visual job so in the design field people will always post what they do. To advertise to other artists, to show off their skills, to get recognition, to get advice, to be part of a community of designers etc etc etc etc.....

 

Designers can only discuss work among themselves....other people could care....ever tried talking bout your job to friends and other people, they dont understand what you do thats why there is a forum like this.

[peterhoste]

I'll write you quite an essay on this once I finish job tomorrow !

 

Edit: I like those bridge images by the way, saw them somewhere already ;- )

 

Thx, looking forward to the essay :-)

 

@ george : i agree with what you're saying : learning from looking at each other's work, is part of the education

but i think it would be better for our trade if most people here went to a museum and learned from the old masters

instead of asking for 'a making of' if you seen one you seen them all, rarely it tells something new or gives me a fresh view on the work.

Now it feels to much we're looking at each other's work for fresh ideas, while it would be better to look at other creative fields for inspiration

 

@ marius : i understand what you're saying, getting recognition from like minded artists is nice, it's good to know what your skills are,

but i rather have recognition from my clients (who have a total different approach to the work) & friends (most of them work in the creative field and have more useful insights

because they aren't bothered by the render techniques, the amount of polygons etc…)

About discussing the work, i think that's no longer the case, it used to be normal 5years a go on forums, but now we just drop the rendering on a site and press 'i like'

where is the discussion ?

 

 

pls take my responses with a few spoons of salt, thx

Edited May 15, 2014 by peterhoste

[michalfranczak]

I see many reasons for posting images on sites (to be clear: maybe I am a little biased, because I am connected to Evermotion company).

 

Every creator / artist likes the recognition. And almost everyone likes to show his / her work to the world. It's very internal motivation that drives all creative people - mostly none of them (us?) is making art to close it in the drawer. So I would blame human nature

 

On the other hand - some of cg artists find some job opportunities thanks to community and their exposure, so you never know - maybe you will get next job because your work goes to the frontpage and will be remembered. I guess that some of cg artists post for that reason.

 

And the third reason is - as George already mentioned - education, improving skills, constructive criticism that can make our works better. Even if sometimes it's painful criticism - lot of artists really want to know what they are doing wrong. Almost as hard as they want to know what they are doing right

[marius e]

Thx, looking forward to the essay :-)

 

 

About discussing the work, i think that's no longer the case, it used to be normal 5years a go on forums, but now we just drop the rendering on a site and press 'i like'

where is the discussion ?

 

 

pls take my responses with a few spoons of salt, thx

 

Well, the change on this forum came since the galleries structure changed. People have since commented less on the images. Anyway, if the image had a rating structure you will find a whole different story.

 

Sure you get recogintion if your client pays you, but thats not the point. Like I said, people want recognition, advertisement and show it to other artists or designers. Simple answer

[Morne Erasmus]

Well, the change on this forum came since the galleries structure changed. People have since commented less on the images.

 

Yes I have to agree with this. The gallery is super cool in the way your images can get displayd on the front page. It's almost "top level" in the sense that it is "open" to the world. Anybody including clients and other non studio people can browse and look at it. This also makes it in a sense less exclusive to me. I'm therefore less inclined to comment on an image or crit it, as non-members can also see the comments. Even though the comments can be harsh or positive critisism, it may make the orignal image poster look like an amateur to the rest of the world.

 

Some of us are in direct compititon with each other. Be that as it may, I still have that sense of we the artists belong to the same "club" in a forum environment such as this. I am more likely to help you or ask for advice if it stays within the "club".

 

So to get to the point, in the gallery as it stands now, I would much rather just click "like" if I see something nice(ish) and not leave a comment. The gallery is just flooded by people saying 1 or 2 words like "nice", "very good" etc.

There is no crit happening and therefore no improvement next time around - in my opinion.

[Zdravko Barisic]

If there were no all those briliant images, we all have been watching 2002,3,4...done in Brazil R/S and Vector Ray 1.09...I guess I would never jump into this...so it is good!

It push your self to be better.

[RyderSK]

Well, to me publishing work online for anyone to see freely had quite too many benefits, and I honestly can't think of any drawback.

 

//wall of text. Sorry about it, when I feel like...

 

1) While some people are perfectly fine with keeping their creations only to themselves, most aren't. Since childhood, most people, including myself find almost equal or greater joy in showing our creations to someone who will appreciate it, it gives our effort another meaning and acceptance. Of course, that needs appropriate audience, and while our mom might be interested in everything we did, most people around don't care about our creative work. So it only makes sense to show it foremost on channels that cater to people directly interested in it. Those channels are now quite diverse, ranging from universal social media like Facebook/Google+/etc.., to specialized ones (all creative biz-Behance, CGI art oriented-former CGHub, ArtStation,etc..) to traditional community sites (cgarchitect,etc.).

 

2)There are many reasons why to decide to post the work and not only one. From purely narcisstic desire to gather attention or appreciation (guilty) to sincerely looking up for honest feedback and critique, it evolves not only our work but how we see our work and ourselves. Many object to derailed state of current feedbacks ("Nice!", "Cool stuff dude",etc..) but truth is, creative minds can be so critical towards their work they have little desire to come with skin to outside. Gathering positive attention or surviving brutal critiques makes us more comfortable with our work or provide another level to self-reflection, which by itself, might be very off to both sides. And especially to beginners, first forum/gallery critiques prime them to client-level critiques, which will be way more harsch.

 

I know about 2 absolutely amazing artists. But they are so conscious of their work they never published single stuff. Of course, because they are so hard on themselves, they improve rather quickly, but have such a low esteem they're afraid to embark on any sort of career or work. They just forever prepare, for years. Publishing their work on any online channel would instantly give them some online fame, and would counteract the biased view they hold of their work.

Oppositely, it applies to deillusional people with inflated idea of current worth of their work. And some harsch critique can help them improve...if they have the humility to accept it. But even if don't...atleast they face reality, which is always good.

 

3)Comparison is good. While it's not healthy to obsess about someone's else work, seeing the work can be inspirative and motivating. This is only possible if people post the works though. If everyone would just keep it to themselves and their clients we would not get far.

 

If people like Peter Guthrie and Bertrand Benoit weren't such an avid bloggers posting their works routinely on forums few years ago, I would have never known there is some ArchViz. Seeing what they do inspired me to jump in and try it myself.

 

4)And now we're getting somewhere. Marketing. Of course clients browse these channels, most clients aren't idiots who click on first google link with "architectural visualization" to some random name (heh, but it seems to be ronen's site and cgarchitect, so, more incentive to post your work where it matters ;- ) ..], they definitely do their search and comparison. Specialized sites like Behance made it very easy for them, they can very quickly compare quality or look for style they like.

It's global market after all, it's not 1990 where most new bussiness came from hear-say between satisfied clients. Your potential "dream client" whom you're planning to steal from D-Box is not going to hear from your local ice-cream store for whom you amazingly visualized their pantry. He routinely looks around the internet. So not being there is really stupid.

 

5)Now the effort can range from rather passive, to obnoxiously intrusive. The former is basically atleast about owning a website. Truth is, no one cares about it, and no one visits them anymore. But it's like your name card, it's pretty, useless, but it's the standard. It's shows that you atleast care. This is enough for all the larger bussiness offices that started time ago, built a large network, and would survive for next 5 years even if they went completely silent.

Sadly that doesn't work for us newcomers. There is huge new pool of different, varried clientelle, that's yet not connected to the industry through any link. How are they going to discover you ? They will browse the internet where it matters. So, it's worth to be there.

 

Again, it's not necessary to over do it. Spamming your work absolutely everywhere, bumping your own work, looking desperate, is not good sight either, and it only annoys everyone. There are very few channels worth paying attention to within Archviz anyway.

 

6) Things change. The social media are here and they are to stay. So no need to be conservative about it and not try to benefit from it. If I were to divide from my experience where my clients found me, it would be comprised by huge margin towards social media, i.e, around 70perc. of my clientelle is from Facebook/Vimeo/Behance. Maybe 1.perc, found me first through website. Neither of my clients ever heard of each other.

I wouldn't discredit either the type of clients that can find you on Facebook. Everyone has Facebook, even your favourite starchitect or CEO of that large company. And there is much bigger chance they will stumble upon you randomly through their interests on social media, that they will look for your boring LinkedIn profile.

 

Social media also facilite exchange of content in way that's not possible otherwise. Your work can travel through Pinterest to 100 thousands of people, increasing the chance of finding new clientelle drastically. I know of so many photographers who literally live purely from this. And we don't need to go far, one of the best and well-known architectural photographers Fernando Guerra (Ultimas Reportagens) is like a poster child for embracing social media, publishing work on it and letting it travel. I highly suggest some interview with him on this subject. Through printed books, thousands would have seen his work, or few of his clients from hear-say or direct recommendation. Now, milions have seen his work and there is no need to worry about future with that level of popularity and exposure.

 

7)Popularity matters. It might seem like useless, pissing contest, but we are only humans. Most people actually, can't tell between good or bad product, until they are marketed to them that way. Or other way...sucess begets sucess. If client see your work is popular among others, he will think it's really good, even if he doesn't have the means or sense to actually evalue it. Same happens with fans, it's train mentality. This gives you the means to actually rise your margins, because you already have the credibility for it in eyes of your client. Apple syndrome ?

 

TL,DR: Yes, worth it, lot's of clients, lot's of work. Win-Win situation.

Edited May 16, 2014 by RyderSK

[Krisztian Gulyas]

Juraj Talcik, I just wanted to say that your answer is simply great.

Thanks for taking the time to write it.

[peterhoste]

thx Juraj but i'm not gonna write you an essay, i don't have the time or desire to do that…. 'less is more' remember :-)

 

I understand most of the things you say: the urge to show your work etc…making a name in the CG community...

But i don't agree with is what you're saying about clients checking the CG sites, if never heard from an architect/client "if seen your on CGarchitect"

Maybe the younger interns are interested in what happens here but the project-leaders the ones who hire my company, no they don't check CGsites: not here, not on twitter, not on Facebook. Those companies are on FB & Twitter but that's just the PR dept. typing PR (blabla), not the architects in charge. Could be generation thing, most of my clients prefer something printed instead of an iPad-show

What they do check are sites like Archdaily etc… so if your client wins a competition with your renderings then you have good exposure and you reach potential clients.

[CJI]

I'm completely agree with Juraj on all the above, especially that clients are increasingly looking at websites and social media to find talent that inspire them and they believe can help them. I've never posted on websites much as i am exceptionally self critical but i did recently set up a behance account. I've already had clients find me and been recruited by a CG studio off the back of this behance account alone without a push in to the wider audience of Facebook, and Pinterest etc yet.

 

Clients, and procurement are evolving rapidly to include these new mediums. You are right Peter that many can still be insular in the way they go about things, but that is changing with the saturation and easy consumption of media on the internet now. Tablets and mobile phones especially get your work out to people in a way that just wasn't possible before.

[peterhoste]

Curtis, a quick reaction :

- Other CG studio's of course look at CG sites, we also hire (local) freelancers who's work we've seen here.

- I think if you want work Behance and Coroflot are better sites to reach potential clients because young architects/creatives are also show their work on those sites.

 

BTW i'm not saying you shouldn't use the internet to promote your work,

i'm only asking why should i post my work here or on evermotion or ronenbekerman.com

Edited May 19, 2014 by peterhoste

[RyderSK]

But i don't agree with is what you're saying about clients checking the CG sites, if never heard from an architect/client "if seen your on CGarchitect"

Maybe the younger interns are interested in what happens here but the project-leaders the ones who hire my company, no they don't check CGsites: not here, not on twitter, not on Facebook. Those companies are on FB & Twitter but that's just the PR dept.

 

Why would only their PR team be on FB ? The PR team is the one who manages the page, but almost everyone has profile to simply look around.

Why should I start listing the name of clients if you simply refuse to believe me after I wrote you that is happens all the time, and is the norm already.

[from countless small designers, who are rather no-name, to mid-sized arch studio such as Mecanoo,etc.. to giant billion dollar companies like HermanMiller, they all found me on...Facebook].

 

Regarding CGArchitect for example, I had the luck to win the "best-of-the-week" award twice, and both times, it had quite impact on how many clients contacted me in following days.

Then there is the in-direct sort of reach: Lot of big arch companies, studios,etc.. have their own internal render/tech teams and those themselves already fit in these communities. But they are also advisors or directly choose who the company will hire for bigger job outside of their internal team.

It's not always the senior architect who contracts the work. If that was the sole case, then yes, most of them don't have time to bother looking for visualizers. Lot of time I am contacted by marketing or design department instead.

 

One last example why CGArchitect is still worth it: Last year, my girlfriend and partner Veronika got into nominations for CG Awards here with single, very simple picture she did for her studio school project. Over the span of the following year, atleast 40 people (and I am not again, exagaring this number, in any way) contacted us over presence, coming directly from seeing it on CGArch, most of these, atleast half, were direct clients of varied sort.

Edited May 19, 2014 by RyderSK

[peterhoste]

It's not a matter of believing or not what you're saying, i'm just asking if it's still relevant to post work on CGsites if the discussion is reduced to an ' i like ' button and what's the impact of showing your work on CGsites, i think that's a relevant question/discussion.

I'm not asking you to post names of clients that have found you on Facebook but it's good to read it works for you (and others)

We worked on many projects with Mecanoo and know them very well so i know they are very internet minded and how they choose 3Dpeople for a project.

I'm only saying for most of our clients it was never that way and still isn't, they don't visit FB or CGsites, it has even come to the point that some clients ask us to show the work only on our website and not on forums or social media or flickr, i've told that story in an other thread here a few weeks ago….

But hey even i :-) understand the impact of the internet will only grow and not go away.

The question is what's worth doing, what works (CGsites or Behance or flickr or FB), what's the impact and having a discussion about it so we can learn and improve things for ourselves and/or for the CG sites.

Edited May 19, 2014 by peterhoste

[RyderSK]

You might just work for rather conservative clientelle, and if you have more clients than you need, than it's futile to wonder if you need to do any additional promoting that you feel is needless to you.

But most people here seem would like more work than they currently have, and it's just now that the gates are really open to much wider and varried clientelle than just traditional architectural offices.

I think the discussion bellow images is quite irrelevant unless someone is interested in feedback. It was after all rebuilt into presentation format, albeit, one not working quite that well.

There are sites that do it quite oppositely, namely Polycount, who puts focus around discussion of the works and their evolution, and very little, if none, to personal promotion. The whole market (game industry) seems to work very differently too. I wouldn't say better at all though..

 

You said yourself in the original format you don't even need any discussion. Neither do I. I am aware of the flaws myself, the image is finished, job is done. I presume, most people fall into this range. So it's really just show-off, comparison, and markering. And it does work :- )

 

By the way, you have really good work, and I 'feel' I've seen lot of that somewhere...so you obviously must have posted them at some time already :- D

 

So do you just want to discuss which platform is still relevant, work best and how they compare to each other ?

CGArchitect/Evermotion/Ronen/Behance/Flickt/Pinterest/Facebook/Website/etc... ?

Edited May 19, 2014 by RyderSK

[eagle_ear]

exchange of ideas/inspiration, and the "no else gets it" bit.

[peterhoste]

Conservative maybe but they have their reasons why they want it this way, going from copyrights and having control which images and how these are made public, to some projects are too sensitive for the general public and they wanna avoid public discussion or their clients (mostly the government with infrastructure projects) only wants the winning project made public. Another reason can be if they don't win the competition they wanna be able to reuse certain design elements. It's not so strange some architects only want want to show the projects they are gonna build, many architects have only 'build/real' projects on their websites and no renderings because the renderings are for them only a tool.

 

I'm on the fence about the discussion of finished work, you always want/expect some great insight, that's of course rarely the case

and like you said most of the time you know already what's wrong (or not) with your finished work, but hey the client wants it that way

so there is no need for a stranger to spell it out once more what you could have done.

But on the other hand having it reduced to an 'i like' button doesn't feel good for the trade, a bit of discussion could be heathy if it's not purely about polygons and which psd filters you have used, but more about what kind of style / mood and why it works (or not) etc...

Wips is of course something different but we never have projects that can be made public before the end of the competition.

 

Thx for the thumbs up of course our work has done the round of sites over the years.

 

I don't ask for a pure discussion about which is the best site or platform, so we can make a top 10.

More about which experience do you have, what is relevant for you and/or for your clients or does it just disappear in cyberspace.

From our experience i can easly say the best promotion for the work is if the client wins the competition and the renderings are get published on

architect-sites like dezeen or archdaily, that's where the potential clients are looking… CGsites never had that kind of impact for us except that it's good for your ego :-) if many (CG)people like the images ….. but that's just what's our experience is.

Edited May 20, 2014 by peterhoste

[RyderSK]

I am quite confused then what was your original intent for the thread then. Seems in every post you argumented why what you and your clients currently do is right. If that's the case, then just keep doing that I guess :- )

The whole point seems absolutely counteractive towards discussion, you already came with conclusion backed up by absolute experience.

 

Maybe I am just reading it wrong (very possible), but each of your post confused me more about what you were after.

 

 

 

From our experience i can easly say the best promotion for the work is if the client wins the competition and the renderings are get published on

architect-sites like dezeen or archdaily

 

On side note, I am watching Archdaily and many other blogs constantly, and I see daily renderings by MIR and other reputable studios never credited properly or at all :- ). I only know by who they are because I know these studios style but that's it. BIG seems to be the biggest offender, never crediting anyone outside their own team.

Edited May 20, 2014 by RyderSK

[peterhoste]

I'm just telling what's our experience over the years, nothing conclusive or absolute about it and it's certainly not the only way or the right way to do it.

 

Sorry but i disagree again, because i think Mir (& Luxigon) are 2 studio's that get most of the time properly credited if their work is on archdaily

and if not they send an email to make a correction. That they win big competitions and get published on architect-sites is a part of their success, that's my feeling, you can disagree with that,...and they make outstanding work of course.

 

Yes some offices like BIG but also Mecanoo never give credit to any outsider (they also do this with commissioned photography) which is an internal rule.

[Nic H]

put it in your contract that images need to credited when published

hayes davidson seem to be credited frequently

[RyderSK]

I'm just telling what's our experience over the years, nothing conclusive or absolute about it and it's certainly not the only way or the right way to do it.

 

Then the whole thread should have been named "Why we don't post our work here" maybe :- ).

 

Sorry but i disagree again, because i think Mir (& Luxigon) are 2 studio's that get most of the time properly credited if their work is on archdaily

 

Here, the latest project on Archdaily by them Koichi for Takada Architects. It's been circulating the internet for 3 months. And I have seen it on dozen websites. If I didn't check MIR's Facebook, I would never have known it's by MIR. No one credited it, neither Takada, neither Archdaily or other blogs.

 

http://www.archdaily.com/496013/kta-details-australia-s-largest-urban-renewal-project/5348646bc07a8073b400000c_kta-details-australia-s-largest-urban-renewal-project_1-_infinity_by_crown_koichi_takada_architects___crown_international_hold-jpg/

 

Other big one by BIG

 

http://www.archdaily.com/450388/big-selected-to-design-human-body-museum-in-france/

 

Again, no credit. Neither on their website.

 

I did a basic search on Archdaily, because I couldn't find any credit for their big works, only the small scandinavian offices. And there weren't... it only returned the name of their renders, which are named like this "1251730351-masdar-300dpi-mir-09-11/" :- )

 

But absolutely, MIR and Luxigon, can definitely live purely from this, the question...can other studios ? Smaller, newer, less talented... ? What's the attainability and future-proof feasibility of doing their (non-existant) marketing for younger clones ?

It's easier for those already established, that's why no big studios bother even coming here at all, but that doesn't make them immune. After all...where is Vyonyx now.

Edited May 20, 2014 by RyderSK

[frankfang]

Well, the reason is pretty obvious for me, I hope to attract more clients for my company, even though it's not the best way, but I wanna give it a try