Professional SU-ers, what do you charge?
-
@unknownuser said:
Unless I've got this industry all wrong
I quite often see job listings from clients who clearly don't appreciate the amount of work involved.
Only the other day I came across someone who wanted 4 or 5 high quality image sets per week (3-5 images per set), but were only willing to pay $30 per image - and that included modelling.
The worst thing was that they already had a freelance artist producing visualisations for these fees, but were looking for someone else to help with the workload.
-
-
Hmm, it seems 3D is worth more in general than I thought.
Not surprising I didn't have a clue, I only know how to do any through hobby. -
Well I have a (poor) salary and no matter how many models and images I complete in a month, I earn the same.
Sometimes I have to work against the clock, sometimes I have a week for something very simple. But, of course, my job is not always about modeling/rendering...
If I do something freelance, I'm also lost when they ask me how much, and I think I tend to ask for less than I should -
Hmm, it's definitely confusing due to the many different charges people put on their work, and then there's the variable of quality etc.
I'm in contact with an architecture firm at the moment who claims their current 3D guys charge too much, and take too long (they said a week..). I'm curious as to what they were paying -
@mrmikeesq said:
Hmm, it's definitely confusing due to the many different charges people put on their work, and then there's the variable of quality etc.
I'm in contact with an architecture firm at the moment who claims their current 3D guys charge too much, and take too long (they said a week..). I'm curious as to what they were payingThat's the thing - many expect illustrations for nothing. Giving no thought to how long it takes to produce the work. And what worsen the problem is that many under-charge their work.
So you need to create a clear picture of how much your time is worth in order to make your own ends meet. If a client expects a render for $20 - then walk away. If anyone questions your rate, explain how you need to charge per hour spend like in every other profession. If they don't understand that - walk away, they are not dealing with you professionally. Spend your valuable time on finding good clients instead.
-
@thomthom said:
If a client expects a render for $20 - then walk away. If anyone questions your rate, explain how you need to charge per hour spend like in every other profession. If they don't understand that - walk away, they are not dealing with you professionally. Spend your valuable time on finding good clients instead.
That sounds logical (and fair), but the problem comes when you live in a city with more than 20% of unemployment, where besides, the few jobs available are for bartenders and shop asistants.
Then when you find a client, they expect to see you crawling for that "small job", and if you don't someone will be more than happy to take the job for whatever he can charge...
-
$20 a render isn't a job. If someone else will work for that, then good luck to them. They'll burn them selves out for nothing. It's not sustainable.
-
Here's something you can hang your hat on.
http://www.cgarchitect.com/news/Reviews/Review070_1.asp
You'll find the average for Europe is about $500-$2,000 for a still. You can sell your time for less or even to pro bono work but both are highly frowned upon. As has been mentioned its unsustainable and only adds to the misconceptions about what we do which makes things harder for all of us. You'll end up being frustrated that you're spending all of your time and energy on a project that isn't as fun as you'd thought and only making $10/hr for what you're doing. Then all of your repeat work from that client will be equally frustrating because it's hard to raise your prices when you originally worked so cheap. And you'll get references from cheap clients but those new clients will also expect the same cheap rates.
As Pete mentions, you have the freedom to not scrounge around for cheap clients shelling out jobs so don't fall into that trap already. Just take the reasonable paying jobs from clients who aren't looking for a bargain rendering.
All that said, you shouldn't expect to be able to charge $1,000 for a rendering if you don't do good quality work so you need to be a little flexible.
-Brodie
-
Well that's a lot higher than I expected. Of course there's different context for different works, residential, commercial, directly to client or freelancing to architects etc.
-
It could be calculated roughly with just a few numbers:
Like:
Expected income per year : $50,000 (a bit lower than average here in Norway)
Add 20% for expenses, hw/sw etc : $10,000 (may be more or less?)45 weeks each with 20 hours work (don't expect to get work full time all year) : 900hours ea year.
$60,000/900h = ~$67 per hour.
You may set the h/week lower, like 10h? Then you end up with $130/h.
It is really a simple calculation. What is more difficult is to calculate how much time you're going to spend on doing the job.For fixed price projects you'll need to know/calculate how much time you'll use for making the model + rendering and compositing.
Could you do it in one day or less, or would you need more time?
I typically calculate with halfday blocks (4h), and usually calc at least one day for a normal/small project.
As I also usually travel and photograph background photos (and often a HDR 360-probe/pano for lighting/reflections) that is calculated/added too. -
One idea I read somewhere is to go ahead and quote a fixed price (not just a made up number but as a result of some sort of time estimate on your part) but then include in the contract a provision for revisions (I like the way that sounds
), where any revisions requested after a certain stage are subject to a fee of $XX/hr. That way you reduce the risk of someone taking advantage of your fixed price by getting free unlimited time sucking revisions.-Brodie
-
Couple of ways... and note I do mainly timber work, shop drawings, and residential presentation work. Not much rendering aside from sketchy stuff that I do within SU and LO. (that is changing, slowly, but I need machine(s)!)
When I do work for multiple 'regular' clients (repeat work) modeling, presentation stuff - I aim for an hourly fee. At the end of the week or good break in the project I invoice for whatever I've done.
For fixed fee or new residential design clients I usually break down the project into pieces, and break out what I think my costs will be for those. If things are open ended from the clients end I'll often tack on a range to that price (if you don't answer X,Y,Z it will cost ... etc.). I also put down some estimated deadlines when I need review / answers. This keeps me honest with my schedule, sometimes keeping me up late - but also puts the burden on the client to get me timely information. I make it clear that if I don't get answers back, they move to the bottom of the pile. To stay on top and on target - they need to work hard too.
Price ranges hourly? $25 to $65, depending on who, how, what, etc. Yeah, thats a big range, but it shifts depending on what I'm doing.
But aside from some 'regulars', I usually charge for what I feel the project will take. Give a range, and try to stick to the low end. Occasionally due to client wishes or incompetence I've blown the budget wide open - (doubled it, on a recent project) - but I make them aware when we approach a brink of price changes. -
bmike, how do clients usually respond when you inform them that things are going over budget?
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
bmike, how do clients usually respond when you inform them that things are going over budget?
-Brodie
Sometimes they look like this:
But I usually give them fair warning, and a list of reasons why.
I only do this if things the client has done has altered my work load.
I try to spell out as clearly as I can what I'm delivering...The last group that I had to do this with took it in stride. They new they blew my time budget chasing all sorts of options and extra work, so they paid graciously.
Its tough, though.
Sometimes reading a client and deciding what they may mean for future work will inform the decision of how much extra to bill. -
@bmike said:
@unknownuser said:
bmike, how do clients usually respond when you inform them that things are going over budget?
-Brodie
Sometimes they look like this:
hahaha, touche
-Brodie
-
Hmm, I agree with the idea of giving revision inclusive of initial price.
Been in contact with another architecture firm today, they're interested but yet to discuss prices. Let's see how this turns out!
-
@unknownuser said:
I think the modeling world is still suffering from 3dMax-ification where everything is overpriced cause the workflow is difficult and the tools are pricey. The surveys I have read are all 3dmax influenced. Modeling and rendering is much cheaper now. I don't need a render farm to produce a 10 minute movie and I can put together a resonable model in minutes not hours.
1500$ a shot....
I don't know... its not that unreasonable. Maybe $1500 for a series (3-4) of shots based on the same point of view, set of materials, etc... (again, I don't do much rendering...) But it would have to be relative to how difficult the materials, lighting, etc. etc. is. I also think that usage plays a role. Are you doing a large format, high res print quality image to sell high end townhouses on the waterfront? Or a few images for a PDF or web presentation to a residential client?
I've paid photographers $1200 for 1 shot, that I have limited rights to use.
Usually done in a day at the most. Sometimes 3-4 hours.
And most of the physical work (the building part) is done (custom timber work / interiors). They need to light, select lenses, views, bracket the shots, maybe arrange a few props... maybe some post pro depending on the scene.One of my old profs used to chide us about practice - 'Ask your plumber what he charges for labor the next time he comes over. Then the next time you bid some work - be sure you can pay your plumber...'
-
@unknownuser said:
I see that the word "revision" is being used here but not the way it works in my world. If it was as simple as getting one drawing and producing an image. I find that architects that use a modeler make many revisions usually because they involve the customer in the process from day one. I put out easily 3-4 revisions for every job because customers change their mind when they see the pre-visuals. I can't see how it is possible to satisfy a client with one version or one iteration of a design. I know that those designers who don't use 3d often over-design. In almost every case the finals require less design elements and less features. I also see pricing based on a single image which also makes me wonder. It takes hours to model and set-up a studio and minutes to produce shots so why one shot? My customers pay for the model and the set-up. I usually give them 6 to 10 good shots for that price. If the model is interesting I may even let an animation cook overnight and give it away.
I think the modeling world is still suffering from 3dMax-ification where everything is overpriced cause the workflow is difficult and the tools are pricey. The surveys I have read are all 3dmax influenced. Modeling and rendering is much cheaper now. I don't need a render farm to produce a 10 minute movie and I can put together a resonable model in minutes not hours.
1500$ a shot....
Well, I think there's 'development' and there's 'revision.' It's the same in an architecture firm. As you design a building you go through some design development process with the client as part of the budgeted plan. However, there reaches a point at which stage any further owner input is considered an 'owner revision' and comes directly out of their pocket.
If you're sending stuff to a $60/rendering firm in China, you won't be expecting any development process but any professional firm will certainly incorporate it. However, there should come a point for us, like architects, where we start charging a revision fee of some sort. For example, one workflow where you're asked to do an animation and renderings might be to send in some initial draft renderings for review of architectural correctness. A back and forth would ensue until a final design and decision is developed and that stage is approved. Then you might do the same for furniture selection/placement or landscaping - more design development and approval. Then perhaps a draft animation for approval of camera paths, speed, etc. Then a final animation and finally the renderings.
But if the client comes back after approving the architecture, furniture, and landscaping and you've sent them a draft animation and then decides they'd like to make some substantial adjustments to the architecture (which will require a significant amount of work at this point) then a revision fee is warranted. Otherwise you're doing this work for free essentially which opens you up to all sorts of problems. Not least of which will be that your client may very well take advantage of you and continue making changes without any repercussions or 'skin in the game' on their part. Likewise your client will expect the same when they deal with others in the industry which would cause us endless frustration.
Why charge per shot? I think you have a point that the majority of the work is in the modeling and texturing but each shot does (or should) require a fair amount of extra work. Parts of the building and site (or interior space) will be visible in each shot that aren't visible in others which require you to model/texture those areas which you could have otherwise left blank (eg. the backside of the building). It may also require lighting changes. And most important, each image will need it's individual time done in Photoshop which may be hours depending on the scene, your workflow, and the quality you're achieving.
If you're just doing a fairly straightforward SU model and snapping off 15minute podium renders and sending them directly to the client then, it's not that big of a deal to send them 3 or 4 compared to 1. But if that's the case you also shouldn't be charging $1,500 for that sort of job. If however, you're modeling a highly detailed model of a large building or complex of buildings, taking great care with your textures, adding high poly cars, trees, bushes, and flowers in a well thought out landscaping plan or high poly furniture for an interior plan, tweaking lighting with a high quality HDRI in the mix, producing a high quality, photorealistic rendering which may bake for, say, 8 hours and then spending 4 hours in photoshop to add some style, people, color tweaks, etc. then you might be justified in charging $1500 per shot if that's the market in your area.
And although that may still sound outrageous or silly to you, looking at it from the client side, that may be highly reasonable. What's $1500 for a rendering if you're a hospital looking for donors to donate millions of dollars to build your hospital and require a high quality rendering in a reasonable amount of time?
-Brodie
-
So if someone asks you for a single front side rendering, you'd model the back side of the building?
We all cut out the modeling somewhere, I think the WHERE depends on a number of factors. Personally, I do typically model the rear elevation even though I know it won't show up in the rendering. However, I'm an in-house guy so I have 2 clients. The ultimate client will never see that rear elevation on the rendering. However my more immediate client is my boss who, at some point, will be looking over my shoulder making design decisions which will include that rear elevation so it's required.
But I think that's the key to determining what you should model - model only what's "required." Otherwise, you're wasting time if you're modeling a side of the building which won't show up in the rendering and you're reasonably sure that the client won't either want to use the full model or ask for an image of that side.
If you find yourself modeling a lot of stuff that ends up as a waste later on, I'd recommend getting more proficient at choosing your shots at an earlier stage.
-Brodie
Advertisement