renderng company-take a look

[shytigercp]

What do you think of this company's work?

http://www.andersonrenderings.com/portfolio.html

[natty]

mmmm .... some detailed work, but renders lack Global Illumination.. the interior shot at the bottom is bad.. why ?

[shytigercp]

re

A long ways back I use to do freelance renderings for this guy...I would use GI in the images (lightscape) I did but he claimed they look more "photo realistic" the way his in-house folks or others like myself were doing them (like the ones you saw on the website). Of course he's one of those guys that can't create a box in Max. What he does and what I found out recently is that he takes begining to intermediate artists (over the internet) and pays them about 100 bucks an image plus lots of changes (his way of getting more images for the price of one). The attractive aspect was that he'd send you a batch of say 8 plans with 3 different options...this would come to about 2400 which sounds attractive for simple houses. But if you're paying me 100 bucks per image, you're not allowed to be picky. Sorry for the rambling.

STCP

[natty]

sounds like a guy i knew who farmed his work out to countries like India where they charge a very small amount and then sold the images on to the client for a big profit ..... bought for £50 sold to client for £800... massive profit margins ... not a love for 3D. i think its rather sad really and i dont think these guy's can last to long in the field of Architecture, especially now where they all expect GI.

[Dynedain]

You don't think they can last long? Think again. We submitted some of our work to a potential client, granted, it wasn't like stuff he typically saw (we do a lot of custom-home and npr type work he does tracthousing). He said it wasn't "photorealistic enough" and sent us examples. The best of the examples were like the ones on that page and only one had GI.

[kippu]

i wont comment on this :P .... but i am ready to talk lots on this topic ...... natty here i come :P

[s0real]

if that's what they call 'photo-realistic' i'd like to see the camera they are using.

some of the images look like cartoons!

[thethule]

Come on guys! Granted its not standard Vray forum GI render loveliness, but that's pretty decent, detailed work there. It works well, the lighting is fairly decent and 99% of clients would be happy with something like this. Unless they expected to get work done in Vray, Brazil or FR, this is photorealistic enough for most people. I think it's very good work. Sorry!
And Natty, believe me this guy will last a long time in his field. At least he's talented. Have you seen how many crummy 3d animations/stills/arch viz/title sequences etc... there are out there? SOMEONE is paying for all that, which means that a people who are actually good at it will last.

Regards,

Marc

[mike_kennedy]

The stuff does not compare to what you see here in the Vray gallery or the Brazil Gallery, but this is pretty much standard quality I see in the local newspapers for Arch Vis exterior work. Most clients are blown away when they see Vray stuff, but how many folks are using tools like Vray in your local market?

[deano]

I think there are still (too) many potential clients out there who are impressed by standard 3d modeling and rendering and who don't pick up on many of the subtle details we all strive to perfect.

It's unfortunate and requires having a client who is open enough to listen to why they need to pay a little extra, and maybe wait a little longer to have an above average rendering/animation - when they see a side-by-side, they're "usually" convinced but often they're just concerend about having it now without any "frills".

Just my 2c from what I've experienced.

[cocolas]

I think there are still (too) many potential clients out there who are impressed by standard 3d modeling and rendering and who don't pick up on many of the subtle details we all strive to perfect.

It's unfortunate and requires having a client who is open enough to listen to why they need to pay a little extra, and maybe wait a little longer to have an above average rendering/animation - when they see a side-by-side, they're "usually" convinced but often they're just concerend about having it now without any "frills".

Just my 2c from what I've experienced.

yeah, I definatly agree w/ you........too often, that's the sad truth.
many times were strive to perfect the little details (lighting/mats/modeling) mostly for ourselfs and others like us rather then the client.....

paul.

[thethule]

Deano, I agree with you to a point. But let's not forget that not every render needs to be super sexy. Sometimes a client doesn't want that or a job doesn't warrant that. I think these renders are perfect for what he is doing. They show good detail, good lighting and good comping. So what if he hasn't got any GI, or photon traced caustics? And as for the client being open and waiting a little longer...that means more money for him to shell out. So, you can understand why some clients don't want that. All of us on this forum who do 3d for a living want to provide the best that we can. I stay late and work weekends so many times, not because I need to, but because I want to do better work. It's just that after 6 years of doing it, I realized that not every job needs the best.
It's not clients jobs to know what we mean by GI etc... they just want pretty pictures for their cash. Fair enough, and if I do something extra nice, I mention it to them. Then the next time, I can most likely squeeze a bit more money out of them for it..


Regards,

Marc

[deano]

I totally agree thethule, I WISH all clients would ask for and appreciate all we try to do...it just comes down to providing the best product for the project (time, moeny, quality, etc)

I think the Anderson Renderings do just what they're supposed to, look good and provide that client with just what they need...

[Mattman]

There's one thing that no one has mentioned here yet....residential developers are cheap. Commercial developers tend to have an ego and want to show off so they spend more for flash. Residential developers are trying to save a buck. That's why they charge for every little upgrade that goes into your new home. I've done enough houses to know that track homes don't offer enough money for high-end renderings. Custom homes, on the other hand, have budgets large enough to reach that quality threshold we all strive for.

Mirage

[Syclone1]

There's one thing that no one has mentioned here yet....residential developers are cheap. Commercial developers tend to have an ego and want to show off so they spend more for flash. Residential developers are trying to save a buck. That's why they charge for every little upgrade that goes into your new home. I've done enough houses to know that track homes don't offer enough money for high-end renderings. Custom homes, on the other hand, have budgets large enough to reach that quality threshold we all strive for.

Mirage

Speaking also from experience, I would have to fully agree with you that new home builders no matter how big they are, are usually quite cheap.

-dave