Charging for extras.

[re:FORM]

Just wondering what the general feeling is here about charging for extra renders from completed projects.

If its just a case of hitting render at 1600x1200 and issueing the client the file, would you just charge your standard hourly rate? or do you have a minimum cap for charging per render?

The assetts are built, and no photoshop required. Just hit render and go. Render time is sub 1hr.

[rpc212]

Hmmm. I don't know how others here will respond as there are really two, if not more, schools of thought on this:

1. to charge for the extra render because you are using your equipment, software etc. and they certainly didn't appear in your office for free, so, of course you should charge.

2. Then there are those that feel that because it requires no more building of assets and everything is done it is just good customer service to include that extra rendering in for free or as part of the original price, however you want to "see" it.

Also, some will argue that charging for rendering is misleading or unfair to the client because one 3D artist will have the latest and greatest computer(s) and will be able to render a scene very quickly whereas another 3D artist will have a 2 year old machine and it will take 3 times or more longer to render the same scene, so hence the inequity of charging for the rendering.

Personally, I think I would charge as you are still using up your computer's clock cycles and there are only so many of those in the life of the computer. Maybe not your regular hourly fee as if you were working on creating assets for a project, but rather a discounted fee. While the extra render is rendering you can go to the rec centre or read a book or whatever and still be getting paid something as you are still using up resources in terms of depreciation and equipment use. Also you maybe going down a slippery slope if you don't charge the client as the client may then start asking for extras and expect them for free. And we all know nothing is for free!

Just my 2 cents!

[re:FORM]

Thanks rpc212.... thats pretty much what I was thinking too.
Its a tricky one, because clients are more clued up on the process these days and know if its just a case of moving the camera and hitting render.

The other issue is the fact that you are providing an image that has value above the actual cost of the process of creation.... ie it has value to the client that you as the artist should benefit from.... which is why I was thinking that no matter how simple the render, there should be some kind of minimum cap to pricing images that reflects the value on the market of the image rather than the specific cost of production.

If you take the analogy of a photographer... the photograph negative represents the 3d model, and prints represent renders. Photographers (traditionally, maybe not so much these days) would charge their client for any prints from the negative.

or in music, you write a track, then someone wants to use a small section of it for a tv program... you dont charge them at a % of the price of the track, you charge a market value... it has nothing to do with the hours taken to make the sound clip (zero hours in the case of music snippets), but its all about the value to the client of the clip.

Maybe these analogies aren't accurate or applicable to the world of 3d visualisation.

[studioDIM]

Thanks rpc212.... thats pretty much what I was thinking too.
Its a tricky one, because clients are more clued up on the process these days and know if its just a case of moving the camera and hitting render.

I SO whished!
Whenever they open their mouths is for the worst.
Let clients be clients, us plumbers do the piping.
Plumbers charge hourly rates.
If you want anything when the plumber's gone home, and recall him, he'll make you pay.
Even for a chat.
And when the plumber's around, noone goes and say "hey pipe that into that, don't you think?It's easy!".
So they should do with cg.

The other issue is the fact that you are providing an image that has value above the actual cost of the process of creation.... ie it has value to the client that you as the artist should benefit from.... which is why I was thinking that no matter how simple the render, there should be some kind of minimum cap to pricing images that reflects the value on the market of the image rather than the specific cost of production.

I Agree entirely: We give for granted so many years of work, and study, just because for most of us it didn't come from school.
I repeat: let the client be the client, and STAY PUT in his place.
They want a service they pay for it, period.
I always say to those "it's easy, give it free" clients: you can always get the material and do it yourself, if it's easy.
You just need a computer, a few licenses of various softwares, and the KNOWLEDGE to make it all work like clockwork.
They don't have that BY DEFINITION (or they wouldn't be the CLIENTS, but the ones making the job), and having and using such equipment has a cost.
Let them pay.
With blood when necessary!

Lele

p.s. ah i love wakeups. i feel so feisty!

[re:FORM]

Let clients be clients, us plumbers do the piping.
Plumbers charge hourly rates.

Let them pay.
With blood when necessary! Twisted Evil

Yep, I don't for one instance consider giving these out as freebies.... but the question is whether you charge an hourly rate for further work... or whether you charge a per-image rate.... which may be 4-5x your hourly rate....

so to make this simple.... for arguments sake. Would you put a minimum cap on providing renders to clients at say 4-5x your hourly rate? less?.....more?....

[studioDIM]

as the plumber, i would put a standard fee for the "call".
Plus the hourly rate, including rendertime.

With blood, i said

Lele

[percydaman]

absolutely charge them. your not JUST changing cameras and clicking render. They're paying you for your ABILITY to be able to just change the camera and click render. Think everyone just knows how to do that? Knows all the settings required to make it come out right the first time?

And then theres the danger of setting up expectations for the future. Believe me, give a client and inch, and they will take a mile. Next time they might want the same thing (in their minds) but it might require more work, cause you didn't model that facade, they assured you they never needed to see, or your renderfarm is currently busy... the list goes on and on....

You dont have to charge them the full fee you charged for the other renders, but make sure you charge something...

[gilpo]

I second Percy. They are paying for your knowledge and skill.

We do most of our 3D under contract, so when we have an extra request, we evaluate how we are doing in terms of time and money compared to the contract. If we are coming out really good, we might throw in a rendering or two for free, but we let the client know that it's because the project has gone smoothly and that we are still within the timescale of the contract.

You want to take care of the client so they come back, but not cheat yourself or set yourself up for future expectations of free stuff. It's a delicate balance.

[tehamnes]

exactly; If you give away renders for free the client expect to have it for free next time as well. That's our experience. We've made that mistake and paid for it. Skills, hardware & software must be paid for. We've started to fee clients pr. image because it also gives us more control over time. We have to get new projects continously you know to keep the wheels turning.
But with good clients we may put in som bonus material as Gilpo. Take good care of the clients you want to keep.

[re:FORM]

exactly; If you give away renders for free the client expect to have it for free next time as well.

I think people are getting the wrong end of the stick here.... I'm not suggesting giving renders away for free.... but whether to charge a capped minimum rate at maybe four or five times your hourly rate, or just to charge for the time taken to render the images.

[dlparisi]

You should generally be able to figure how long it takes prior to starting the job just how long it should take you to render out each image (whether it be 15min or 8 hours). I'll assume your doing this inorder to get a cost to the client anyways. What I do in my proposal is include a line under an "Addtional Services" section like the following:

• "Additional Views: Additional views of previously modeled exteriors can be provided for $$$$ per image. Cost assumes no additional modeling or texturing will be required, in which case, standard Additional Service rates apply."

It may not be the best contract language but the clients understand up front that addtional images aren't free and no one gets upset. I change the amount based on each job's complexity, factoring in the time it takes me to set up each shot, render it out and tweak it a little in photoshop (usually about 3-5 hours). Since I'm a small shop (just me), when my main machine is rendering it pretty much means I can't work on anything else so I figure straight time for the time it takes to render. I've also never had the client just accept the alternate view I give them, there's usually some back-and-forth about the position and angle of the shot so this adds time too.

[studioDIM]

as i said: a "call" fee you decide.
That's HIGH, the body of what you'll gain.
Plus the topping of whatever hour you spend working and rendering.
At standard rates.

In big places, when a client comes back and asks for a job, a person has to go in the archives, find the correct material, restore it and check it works.
You do it yourself.
It's a cost. Covered by the "call" fee.

And then there's an operator that has to get back to terms with the job, and prepare the new renders.
And those are the hours you will put in.

That's how i do it, anyways.

Lele

[olitech]

Definitely should be charging per image!!!

[Giovanni]

Well, I think if we read the actual question we can clearly understand that the client has already payed for a certain amount of service.

After that, it is true that 99% of the work is done when it comes to extracting "comparable" images from the same scene.

For example, same everything, but they want to see the mullions black instead of white.

Yes, you can charge them, but I do not even bother issueing an invoice for...half an hour?

Rather, I send the extra image in, on the house. They will be pleased, or at least they will know you are not trying to milk them out.

Next request, no matter how small, you can always charge some money, if you keep track of previous, free services.

Ultimately, it all comes down to the actual amount of time you need to spend to satisfy the extra request. Under one hour work, you need to consider many factors, including how much you like this client and you want them to come back to you.

Over an hour, I would bill hourly.

Definetely, if the original agreement came down to a grant per image, I would never charge a grant for extra images. It is like stealing for me.

Delicate topic, anyways.

regards

gio

[re:FORM]

You should generally be able to figure how long it takes prior to starting the job just how long it should take you to render out each image (whether it be 15min or 8 hours). I'll assume your doing this inorder to get a cost to the client anyways. What I do in my proposal is include a line under an "Addtional Services" section like the following:

• "Additional Views: Additional views of previously modeled exteriors can be provided for $$$$ per image. Cost assumes no additional modeling or texturing will be required, in which case, standard Additional Service rates apply."

It may not be the best contract language but the clients understand up front that addtional images aren't free and no one gets upset. I change the amount based on each job's complexity, factoring in the time it takes me to set up each shot, render it out and tweak it a little in photoshop (usually about 3-5 hours). Since I'm a small shop (just me), when my main machine is rendering it pretty much means I can't work on anything else so I figure straight time for the time it takes to render. I've also never had the client just accept the alternate view I give them, there's usually some back-and-forth about the position and angle of the shot so this adds time too.

thanks for your input dlparisi. That pretty much ties in with what I was looking for.... 3-5 x hourly rate... which seems reasonable.... and thanks for suggesting the addition services section to my proposal. Feking obvious, but something I've not included up till now!