I’ve just updated my subscription to 3dsmax and been told by my reseller that I get a penalty of £60+vat because of late subscription. Has anyone else experienced this ? This apparently comes direct from Autodesk and not the reseller. I find it a damn cheek that they do this…feel like I’m being treated like a child and being told off. I have been a loyal customer over many years ! I think the fact that many of us purchase the software and subscriptions and have to put up with many bugs and a fairly long wait before the new software can even be integrated within the work pipeline makes this a real turn off when it comes to purchasing Autodesk products in the future. You wouldn’t see Pixologic doing something like this. They know how to treat their customers and they certainly aren’t money grabbing gits as Autodesk appear to be !
yes I’ts been like that since the start of subscription. It suck’s but they do it to stop people from paying say every 18 months instead of 12. Over a couple of years it adds up and it would mean that you cheated the system. That’s why they charge penalty. But if you’re late by maybe a month or so, then yes rediculous that you have to pay penalty
It was about a month and a half I was late by..I’ve requested a waver and waiting to hear back.
we just renewed our subscription for three years… ouch! $40.000.00 … and people want to charge $200.0 for a renderings!!?[quote=“glorybound, post:26, topic:37687, username:glorybound”]
It was about a month and a half I was late by..I’ve requested a waver and waiting to hear back.
[/quote]
is that $4000 ? Im assuming its not $40,000 ? heh
I think my head would fall off if I had to foot that bill. How many seats do you have?
ah, it is 40,000…I should have guessed you had more than one employee. I don’t think that makes my complaint any less valid though.
We have 12 seats of Revit Architecture, 3 seats of NavisWorks, 3 seats of Quantity TakeOff, and 3 seats of 3DS MAX. So, we use the other software for construction documents, project management, and estimating.
So. I think you would have to do about 15 $200.00 renders to justify annual subscriptions for three seats of 3DS MAX. This doesn’t, of course, include plug-ins like V-Ray, hardware, infrastructure, and the initial investment. It would take 3 years to pay off your initial investment if you were charging $200.00 per still.
I think your figures are a little off there… It’s $495 USD per annual subscription for 3ds Max, so you would actually have to do 7.4 x ‘$200.00 renders’ to cover the cost of three seats. Or another way to look at is that each seat would need to produce 2.4 ‘$200 renders’ per year to cover their own cost.
And our office wont even bill out for renderings so its part of our overall services. So sad.
I dont think the people charging $200 a still are totally legit… most freelancers and studios aim to charge 20x that.
unless you live in your mom basement, use illegal software, and do poor work, you couldn’t do it. My premise is, people use their free time to do nice work for a portfolio, and place low value on what they do to get work. They’ll quickly find out that a, “for fun project”, isn’t anything like a real project. I have some clients that are easy to work with, but others are not so easy to work with. It’s easy to be your own boss on your own fictitious projects.
TELL ME ABOUT IT!!! How are we suppose to then justify ANY upgrades or extra plugins???
And dont forget, you still have to pay the salaries for the people in those 3 seats, electricity, incurance, etc etc
Obviously - but since we’re only discussing the cost of subscriptions none of that’s really relevant.
I didn’t realize it was only $495, which isn’t to bad. I guess I should look at the invoices I sign 
Yea you start max and your company looses money. I show my renderings to the client they go insane for them and then dont want to go back and look at cad plans again. But because we cant bill for it we have a loosing circle - the client wants more changes because they are more engaged in the design process (thought that was a good thing) but then everything has to happen just in CAD or back to max which wasnt included in the scope so you make the company loose $$$.
In my experience, if it’s free and just okay, it’s good enough. I don’t think anybody doubts that a photo-realistic render, that is well thought out, is better that a poorly done render. I think it simple economics… if it gets the point across, and is a by-product of the model, then it’ll work in a lot of cases. If you are trying to win a job, it’s a different story. More often than not, the illustration I did for the last job, helps us get the next job. My time, for the most part, is a marketing exercise. Marketing, again for the most part, is an overhead. You can’t bill the client for a billboard or webpage, either.