ŷ��AV

Great write up Simon.

Thanks Simon, Great read

Thank you Simon! I appreciate the clarity, and it's really good to be talking about these things. Looking forward to another article!

Hi Scott,
Thanks for the kind words and for adding some interesting thoughts on the topics mentioned.

Indeed the diagnosis part has to be thoroughly done otherwise you can end up focusing on the wrong aspect of a project. Here I guess experience is key. Even if "every project is different", you can still know which approach works and which one doesn't for a specific result expected. As you mentioned, it is also quite common that the architect doesn't uncover properly the problem at hand, which is a topic I want to tackle in a similar article I intend to write but tackling the inverse problem (architects misconceptions on how to work with archviz artists). I think the diagnosis quality is also really dependent of the type of client. It's likely that architecture firms that work more with concepts and diagrams can give you a stronger and clearer diagnosis to work with whereas more "operational approach" firm will maybe miss the underlying power images can have and will only focus on more basic things thus giving a less elaborate and underwhelming diagnosis to work from.

You're totally right regarding the potential disconnect between beautiful and successful and the client's interpretation. I think it comes down to the clarity each side has to have in their communication, and maybe even honesty. The client has to be crystal clear on what is the real intent behind the images they are paying for, and the artist has to be as analytical as possible of his/her own work, as well as being transparent regarding what the image crafted really conveys because sometimes the client will often just take your word for it and you can basically pass a "beautiful image" for a "successful one" even if there were actually better options out there. And as you mention, the architecture business health itself relies on successful image rather than beautiful, making this point all the more important.

I hope this addresses your comment correctly and raises some ideas.

Kind regards,
Simon

Simon - thank you so much for sharing your process with us! I really enjoyed your insights. It's great to shed some light on archviz business practices as this topic is usually avoided or simply overlooked. I'm glad to see you address topic #'s 3 and 9 (serving the client not the portfolio, and understanding the final audience) - I believe these are deeply related. Just want to expand a little bit on these two items.

At the project kick-off the artist should try to learn as much as possible about the end-user / final audience, and more importantly answer the question, "what is the problem I am being brought in to solve?" Sometimes it is simply to "check a box" for a client's submittal or something similar and you can get in and out very quickly. But often, the real problem needs to be uncovered with the artist's help. Once properly diagnosed, the artist can then propose an appropriate solution. This solution is a big part of the value proposition stated in topic #1.

Per #3 (and also #5 as well?), I see a lot of beautiful archviz imagery that feels meant only for the portfolio. If not communicated clearly, these images can create a disconnect between the client's level of expectation and the real constraints imposed upon commercial work. It is essential that the client understand what they are seeing, and that the artist is upfront about the effects of the given constraints on their timelines and methodologies. I have seen this disconnect become a source of misunderstanding and conflict when not addressed properly. When hiring an artist, it can be very difficult for a client (or art director) to tell if an image is "successful" or only "beautiful". A business' health relies on its ability to be successful in this case.

I hope it's okay to add these points to the discussion - I'd love to hear any thoughts or comments, as this has traditionally been a very under-discussed area of the creative business. Thanks again for the contribution!
Best,
Scott

Thanks for the very kind comment Duy Phan, glad you found some useful pitfalls and I hope you'll manage to spot them if they ever happen to you so that you can better avoid them.

Pruning is definitely a tricky part especially when you're freelancing and can't get feedback from other experienced archviz artists. The worst case scenario still being to flood your client with too many options so that they can't really weigh them constructively.

Kind regards,

Simon

This is really a "play-book" level of sharing spirit. It slashes those client-related problems to the bones. I have learned some of the points the hard way and I am warned with the others from now on!

I enjoy so much when you covered the pruning part. As being (so so much) creative and explorative, artists sometimes lost their way in the journey of reaching the project's needs by finding and developing "miles-away" discoveries. Yet, to be honest, filtering your own ideas, especially fascinating but not so irrelevant ones, is a process that needs toughness and self-critical or in other words: f*-hard!

Thank you for sharing your valuable experiences with us, Simon and look forward to seeing more published works from you!

Best,
Duy Phan