Odd (non) Problem

[WendyWelton]

Chief Architect has generated a rather odd problem for me. If I bring people into the office, they want to spend hours looking at different view. ART, you've created a monster! Yes, I know, I'm calling Steve tomorrow to get my Client View pack. Hopefully that will feed their thirst.

I also find that once they realize I can do the sexy looking rendered views, they want more. I'll have to deal with existing clients, on fixed fee contracts from before I switched to CA - and probably just feed the beast. I was wondering how everybody else handles getting paid for renderings and "looky" time, the higher level of detail that it's possible to show, and other such happy problems.

Wendy

[David J. Potter]

Wendy,

You will just have to decide what is a fair exchange for your time and act accordingly relative to what "the market will bear" and how you see yourself within it. I charge by the hour only and set my hourly rate based as above. No one knows what your time is worth except you. No one is responcible for your life but you. Everyone else just wants create their own economy relative to what seems right to them.

DJP

[dgavin]

Wendy,

I think either hourly (they really get a lot for there money) or
a fixed fee with a set number of views. Depends on how you
interact with them. Renderings aren't too bad but raytracing is
a whole other matter when it comes to getting compensated for
your time. Don't plan on doing any printing when you ray tracing!
Other tasks also get comprmised so it's not like you can figure,
"gee, I can do other stuff while the computer does the ray tracing".

[EricWK]

Hi Wendy,

I generate a task-by-task phase proposal at the start (partly based from on my own methods of rough sq. footage modified with percentage +/- according to areas in concern, as well as my known time/effort to accomplish) of a new project. Within this proposal/agreement, there can be a determined promo. for some good render studies. By the time I have accomplished a good run on my pre-determined fees/task (a check back in my hand each time I meet & deliver) for permit/constr. development, a bit of gradual build-up from some black-line 3-d's even with some old-fashioned hand touchups early, then some laser-print renders along the mid-dev., ... by then full color 3-d delivered by website posted client areas, or by hard copy at an out-sourced pro. print service at a review mtg. hits many good points. Value for the time and efforts, grows client appreciation by not zinging too much all at first. Per hour/per print presentations beyond initial estimates for the c.d.'s has been no prob. here. Builders even love to communicate with owners just for sake of a common 3-d set of views that truly match or enhance the 2-d, blackline c.d. print set.

Eric

[Larry Kumpost]

Wendy:

It can be a real problem. I once made a few minor changes to a plan while my clients were watching and they automatically assumed that creating the plan and getting the more complex aspects of the design to show correctly was just as easy. Bottom line was they did not believe the amount of time it took to do the plans, clean up section/elevation views, draw special details etc. and set up the layout files for the bid documents. Didn't matter that I was within the fee I quoted.

The truth was that this particular design had some tricky roofs, dormers and other design elements that took more time than I had expected. I attributed some of my time to learning more about Chief and had not even billed the full amount. As a result, I don't let clients watch me work anymore, except for a few that understand the entire process.

I do not have a problem showing people as many views as they want but you either need to factor that into your fee for basic services somehow or identify what is included and what is an additional service that is not included in the base fee. Some clients know what they want and are easy to work with while others are not real sure and can be a real....ahhh problem.

Because there is always chance you will get clients that don't really know what they want it is a good idea to describe limits to the design phase of the project in your agreement. Without something to describe reasonable limits you risk having to deal with clients that believe they are entitled to an almost endless stream of design ideas and options.

In the same way you can define limitations on the number of views that are included in the base fee. Exactly what you do and how you state it will depend on the level of service you provide.

[EricWK]

One other concern to consider to maintain some control to the effort / time / value (real or perceivable) to be paid is that if there is not a real paper trail to represent your design development accomplishments, options and/or revisions, then any client might just as well easily forget to weigh this into your need to be compensated with per/hour or per image/sheet billing. Revisions on the fly and over your shoulder on-screen with your clients could get assumed to be virtually effortless by the end, despite your skills and experience.

[WendyWelton]

This is all great feedback and advise. I do work in front of clients, and always have, so Larry's experience is something I'll have to anticipate. I work with a Business Coach, and "managing expectations" is a major topic.

What I do now is Schematic Design hourly, and then a fixed fee, based on the components of the house and their complexity (sounds like very similar to what Erik is doing). I start with one fee that covers one floor, with it's associated basement and roof. Then I add for each component that increases the work it takes to produce the drawings - second floor, porch, each bathroom, etc. Then I factor up or down by a "complexity" factor.

I think I'm going to expand this list to include the new possibilities, and add to the definitions in my Standard Conditions. I'm even thinking a short booklet of examples might be more useful than written descriptions.

Any more thoughts will be welcome - pitfalls, experiences, the good, the bad and ugly.

Wendy

[mcqueenhomes]

I bill raytracing basically by the hour for the computer. I run raytracings while I'm doing other things around the house, so I don't bill that time at my normal rate for the 3D Chief modeling until I start post-processing the image. Even if I'm busy working somewhere else, I could still start a raytracing before i go to bed. Fortunately POV-ray usually gives the render time.

The reason I bill by the hour for raytracing is the variability, some scenes take longer due to lighting or the image size may be a factor.

When I do 3D modeling my hourly rate is pretty reasonable so I go ahead and bill the time it takes me to figure something out. I'm getting paid to do that since my customer is typically busy and obviously willing to pay to have someone else figure it out or they would be doing it instead of me. Even if I have to figure something out, help from my experience, and the ChiefTalk forum, and sometimes I swear I get help from God (my last job was terrain and it was a miracle I got anywhere close), usually means I find that it doesn't really take that much longer anyway.

I've only done one or two raytracings paid though, most of what I get is fixing the model.

I don't have the challenge of working in front of clients. Most of my customers are already familiar with Chief anyway. My challenge is usually related to the time difference between East and West, and also waiting for e-mail responses.

[cgirerd]

When I first meet with a client and they see my portfolio or look at my website which is heavy with raytraced graphics, I make sure to tell them that's at the end of the design phase when we're nailing down the details. And that initially, especially if we're starting at the stage of "should we just add on to the one story level, or maybe do a two story addition or ???" that I'll just do one exterior view per plan idea to give them a feel for that design. Then, once we've started narrowing down the scope, it will be worthwhile to produce the more detailed raytracings. The key I've found is to let the client know in a polite way that you're limiting the upfront photorealistic drawings to save them money. That usually seems to click with my clients especially when they know we can get to "the good stuff" later on. But I usually add that I'm happy to do more 3D work at the beginning if they really want it, but it would add a lot to the cost. And once in a while, they do want to may more to have more 3D at the start, but they know that isn't in the normal scope and they're paying extra. (I charge everything hourly and give clients a "not to exceed without approval" number of hours estimate for each session.)

And Wendy, I like your idea about showing them a booklet of what to expect. I always show my clients one or more previous set of actual drawings/renderings for a similar project so they can see the level of detail (or lack thereof) at initial stages and the type of 3D work produced; and then how it gets narrowed down and detail increases as we progress with each additional set. It really helps client understanding since "preliminary design" or "schematic design" doesn't mean anything to most of them.


Christina

[VHampton]

I agree with Larry that sometimes a client will get the notion that our work is all to easy when they see Chief in action. Especially when they say that changes are a snap, and it will "take no time at all". A little mystery to the process is a good thing. Just because someone becomes quite proficient at their trade doesn't mean it should cost less because they can do it fast or effortlessly.

Setting up a list of drawings in the initial agreement is a great way to keep things under control. It's much easier to tell them what to expect rather than doing endless rendering magic just because you have the ability.