Arch Viz, what's next and how to survive

[Francisco Penaloza]

First, some of you already know me, I don't want to sound like a downer, actually I am always looking the bright side, but as one of the old-timers here, I can tell you things are really changing in our industry, and honestly, for the first time, I feel kind of lost.

 

Quick intro, I been doing this for too long, I consider myself as a decent artist, I have worked as a freelancer, per contract and in house CG person, I have done many projects all sizes, from small houses to large development, Hospital, colleges, stadiums towers for the kings!

from Arch Viz to TV production, medical, military, products, you name it.

 

But all that was done always the same way, Raytracing. Long hours to modeling then massaging materials, lights, cameras, then submit to render, hope for the best, then another bunch of hours for post-processing, comments comes, things need to be changed, rinse and repeat.

 

But with the last few years, all this workflow is turning in to an archaic workflow. Also, the expectation or 'requirements' from clients has changed, a lot. Before a simple flythrough will wow everybody, now, they want, still images, animations, google cardboard panoramas, and VR in a week!! because there is someone on this planet that can provide all that, with a decent quality, how this happened??

 

I remember in this mere forum we all laugh with the 'render killer' software, (Twinmotion by then) promising High-quality images and video with just a few clicks. it took them longer than they hoped to deliver something competitive, but the concept stayed and was taken by other companies and boy they delivered to the promised. If not at 100% but pretty darn close, so close that "good enough' became the norm. This happened mostly for inhouse project, I am sure for outside dedicated houses, this good enough didn't hit them that hard, but I wonder if it is more present than I think, I know competition from 'cheaper countries' is the main concern, I know some of them do not even pay for the software they use, but sadly at the end of the day, most of the clients don't care! they are happy to get things overnight and a very low cost.

I would love to know how this applies to other countries besides the USA. Sadly here, good enough is very strong.

 

How a person like my self evolve in this environment? becoming a creative director? but still, I have the same problems of how to feed your team with projects. Realtime time software/workflow is here to stay, the software is becoming stupid easy to use, and pretty soon also smarter, imagine adding Ai to something like Enscape, not only can raytrace at the speed of thought but also can compose your shot, choose the best color grading for your scene or to match some style from a given image. Maybe in the close future even choose the best textures or 3d models from a large database.

 

Are we Arch Viz person a dying craft, just like masons? shoe repair/maker?

 

I know many would think, learn the new software, move to management positions, but my point is to the craft itself, what's is the future of Arch Viz, is that word even apply for what's in the future.

 

We will become the stock item provider for studios or firm, I mean like preparing textures or materials so a regular designer can them? Not an Arch viz person, but an Architect, or Designer, a DP or Video editor, or any other none Viz person. Will we become the realtime monkey that just knows how to set up the new realtime software for the client to experience the new VR/AR mix reality hologramatic presentation? this is until the software does by itself of course.

 

Animations, still renderings, will stay with us for a long time. I am sure of it. Because so far is simply the best way to 'tell a story'

VR/AR can't really tell stories, it actually puts you in the story for you to explore or experience, that's a different concept and not many people like that. But overall I believe Arch Viz is up to the gates of a drastic change, in the way we work, and what we produce.

 

I would love to know, how things are changing for you and what you think about it.

 

Cheers.

Francisco P.

(Sorry for my grammar, English is not my first language.)

[Tom Bussey]

You have to look at the bigger picture, if you just want to be a technician, then you need to be totally on top of your game, in terms of software, and have multiple tools in the box. If you want to be an artist, you need to be excellent at artistic direction, be able to direct others into a comprehensive vision informed by current and past trends and aesthetic rules. Look at the successful companies in the CGarchitect features: DBox are where they are by acting as a one-stop marketing shop, not just producing great images, MIR are more of an artistic outlet, but they are one of the best, visually, IMO.

 

As a freelancer, you probably have to be an all-rounder, so yes, occasionally come out of your comfort zone and learn new software/techniques. Caveat: I'm as guilty as anyone at resting on my laurels here. Obviously that stuff requires down-time, or being less productive then you usually would, but you'll have to decide the tipping point at which you think you're missing out on work, or getting left behind. If clients are expecting multiple formats, then maybe a real-time solution would work better for you in the long term. As artists, I think it's important not to get too hung up on process, or rather, set in our ways, but again I'm guilty of this as most. Being a quite 'technical' profession, it's probably a fairly universal trait.

[Lewis Garrison]

Real time rendering brings a refreshing excitement to what we do in the Archviz industry. If you haven't already, i'd really, and I mean really, give Unreal Engine 4 with the Datasmith workflow a try. It has enough familiar concepts, yet is new enough to possibly spark an excitement in your workflow. And trust me, there's plenty of real-time monkeys that know the program up and down yet produce absolute visual garbage. To make good architectural visuals still takes skills, knowledge and that artistic eye that you probably already have from your experience.

Also (just my opinion) programs like Twinmotion and Enscape are not programs that are made for us. It's mostly for architects who simply don't have the time or money to hire people like us. It's fine under a time crunch or if the client wants something that's just good enough but what's the point if you know know there's something better.

Edited July 23, 2019 by lewisgarrison

[jesusgomez2]

Well there are a lot of concepts here.

 

Programs like lumion, endscape, twinmotion will raise the standard level of the industry. I mean, from a technical point of view you should be able to produce much better quality images with vray, corona, fstorm... there, you can get photorealism, needed for multiple companies.

 

Then, if you are capable of combining an excellent visual level with a great art direction, i don't think you will have a problem to get clients.

 

Apart from that, you need to be always connected to new tools, news etc in this world. And learn, never stop learning new things.

 

As Lewis says, unreal 4 it's and amazing piece of software to explore, changing materials in real time is like magic to me when i do it, but that it's just an example, never lose the love and illusion of what you do, that's the key in my opinion.

[Francisco Penaloza]

Hi everyone,

thanks for your input on this. I just would like to clarify some things that may be got lost in translation.

First I work for an Architectural firm, we are about 400 employees with two Viz artist LOL, I am the Sr Viz person, my boss, creative director, anyone else are designers, architects that also do renderings.

I am very technology-oriented, I really love what I do, like mentioned I started a long time ago, my first rendering was with pen and airbrushes. So it has been a long trip for me, but again I am happy and always excited for what new tech will bring us, so much that I was the one who introduced Enscape, Lumion, and Twinmotion to the company that I work for, why I did that? because there was a very big gap in what I or my boss can produce and what a regular designer or Intern could produce. We can not work for all the project of our company, when I started we tried, but we would have to hire a large amount of viz people to feed each project. Some companies do that, others outsource the work, our company can't do that, so I look for other solutions.

 

As mentioned by @Jesus we use Enscape and Lumion/Twinmotion so the architect can produce something better than a quick SketchUp with a bad Photoshop in the top. And that is when I noticed a trend.

 

@Tom, my point of this is actually the big picture, on my daily work I do lots of R&D, I am producing VR presentations with Unreal, working on AR and finding uses for Holo lens tech too. we have all the headsets, we use VR during design too. Clients love it, multi-user Unreals and all the good stuff.

 

My point of writing here wasn't about complaining because of technology, my point is how our industry is changing, and if we project into the close future it may be radically different.

 

To my point, we had a couple of clients that still ask for Hand-drawn renderings, one of a kind. I do some of those sometimes, other time when I don't have time we send to someone who used to work with us, that was all that he did, had draw renderings, he is retired now, he just does because like me, or many of us, he just like it, but he recognizes he is in an extinction path.

 

Since I work in house, and I work in the USA, I was wondering, if the same trend or struggles that I see here replicate in Europe, or Asia or anywhere. Have freelancers seen a decline of their workload because of tools such as Enscape or Lumion.

 

Yes I know that big Houses such Neoscape, DBOX, and others, they don't call themselves ArchViz studios anymore, they have moved on, grown, evolved.... but maybe is because only doing 'regular Arch viz' doesn't pay any more. and that's my point.

 

Our industry, Arch Viz is evolving, and I am not talking about learning a new software, I am talking about a new way to present or display projects and products. a new media. If you think about it, Arch Viz started with Architects doing less technical drawings of their project, then it grew, they need a specialist to create them, now thanks to technology, they are going back to be able to create those images them self, without disrupting their regular workflow or taking much extra time. How crazy is that.

[artmaknev]

The industry has definitely evolved in the past 10 years! From my observations, since I started working professionally in the archviz from 2007 til now, the industry is branching off into 2-3 completely separate paths.

 

In my opinion, there will be always a need for photoreal Real-Estate imagery that cannot be replaced by realtime or lumion software. Because in real estate, we are selling the lifestyle, the clients prefer more emotional, story telling images that can sell you the house, so the main hero in this branch is the image. The image that will be printed on billboards, magazines and displayed on the websites. The extra gimmicks (AR, VR, animation) are extras that might not have the same effect as the main selling image. For this extra gimmicks, I think there will be a specialized field, so the client might even outsource to another company and give the stills to another.

 

So far we have two very related branches, that can still be separated:

 

Branch one - Real Estate (highly specialized on stills to sell the lifestyle)

 

Branch two - AR/VR/Animation (company that provides the extra gimmicks)

 

The third branch - is the situation that you have mentioned regarding architects and designers using new quick software such as Lumion to speed up their designing process. The quality of Lumion has greatly improved in recent years, but it still far from high quality real-estate imagery... and I do not think it can ever claim that field, it is not specialized in that direction.

 

I am sorry to say that, but I think the third branch is going to be a bit hard for the archviz artist to survive in...because if all the architects can do good enough visuals and if a company only needs this kind of level, then why the need for the archviz person? Of-course if the company is big enough it will always have an archviz department, because thats what big companies do. However, for midsize and smaller architectural firms I think archviz artist will be an extinct creature.

 

PS: By the way, hand drawing is making a comeback, I see more and more renderings that are a mix of sketchup + hand drawing. I think this is some kind of an exotic archviz trend that only a few will be able to specialize and make quite a nice income!

Edited July 27, 2019 by artmaknev

[Alex York]

Hey,

 

I've not posted in here in years but this thread caught my eye. Some interesting thoughts.

 

"I work for an Architectural firm, we are about 400 employees with two Viz artist LOL, I am the Sr Viz person, my boss, creative director, anyone else are designers, architects that also do renderings. "

 

I think all that there spells it out, really. Working in-house at an architects practice is extremely limiting in terms of one's creative or even technical freedom. I would suppose that most of the time you're being asked to visualise someone's evolving design, constantly make changes and... that's where it ends usually, I guess? It's a VERY different beast to being a visualiser in a visualisation studio, especially one that focuses on marketing. In many ways it's almost a completely different industry. Producing visuals for marketing is VERY different to producing visuals for planning. And both are drastically different to producing visuals for internal design development approval.

 

I think you might be focusing on the wrong thing. Instead of being concerned about software and technological change leaving you by and where the industry is going, perhaps you should look at your end goal - where you personally are going. Who and what are you producing your images for? What do you get out of it? What can you bring to the industry? Keeping up with tech change is essential, totally, but in the end the tools are not the critical thing. Pile-em-high-stack-em-cheap will reap the benefits of real-time as they can *** out a load of basic visuals in no time at all for a decent short-term profit - more power to them! The industry absolutely NEEDS those companies to allow the higher end outfits to shine through. The trick is to compete at the right level.

 

It's the age-old problem of commercial arch-viz. We're all artists, yes, but we're producing commercial work for corporate clients in the end (mostly). It's not just a free-for-all splurge of unbridled creativity and narrative and wild experimentation and R&D into new software and techniques. Finding an environment where you can apply some of those things, or maybe even all of them, even in a small way in your daily work, yet in a commercially viable way - that's the dream, I think... We come across a great many young artists who are fiercely hungry to unleash their creativity but struggle with the commercial side of the industry. It's hard! And it takes most people years to find the right balance that satisfies the artist, their employer and their clients. And I'm not just talking about in-house artists but creative leads, freelancers, studio founders - all of us.

 

From a business POV, competing at the low end is easy - being cheap you're always going to be busy. Competing in the middle is VERY tough, as it's extremely hard to differentiate and offer something unique to clients. Competing at the higher end is therefore somewhat easier, counter to what most people might imagine. When you're not really competing on price any more it's all about service, connections and offering something unique to the client - why come to you instead of these other guys? Style choice is one major element, and that relies on super strong and confident art direction and a really, really solid studio culture. That takes time to nurture too.

 

And when you look at the leading respected studios around the world, they are NOT alike. The work they produce is unique to them, their workflows aren't the same, their people/attitudes/studio life is not the same, their clients are not the same.. it's a very interesting time for the industry, in a good way. There's a lot of innovation happening, a lot of looking back too - overlooked techniques and styles are coming back into fashion (as Art Maknev said) - lots of opportunities. The most successful artists and studios will be the ones who can leverage that while remaining commercially viable.