57 responses so far ↓

• 1 Spencer Johansen // Mar 3, 2008 at 6:04 pm

  Spot on. Our school didn’t want us getting hired just to do CAD, so they taught us FormZ. I still don’t know AutoCAD, or FormZ as well as one should, which is OK since no one actually uses it, and the one job interview i’ve had, even though they’de be hiring me as an intern and are required to provide a range of work experience, not knowing basic autocad was a problem. But the rest of what I had to show them wasn’t spectacular, so If you have quality designs and images to show, whatever the media, they probably would hire you and let you learn autocad on the job, maybe. They may advertise for interns, but are really just looking for cad drafters.

• 2 Roman Diaz // Mar 4, 2008 at 12:56 pm

  That was exactly my case. I went out from school y hired by a big architectural firm. With the time they realized I had hability to model and render …and my life was miserable. Endless hours at the office, the boss sitting with me requesting changes and changes….but my check was the same.
  Then, with all that hard earned 3d experience I started my own profesional rendering business. Now I’m happy, and from time to time I can enter architectural contests with my own ideas.

• 3 robin // May 16, 2008 at 1:26 am

  “The Employer Doesn’t Have Knowledge of the Software”

  This is a problem with drafting as well. This is one of the reasons you went to the boss 2 weeks ago to try and wrap up the inconsistencies and unanswered questions that they decided to leave to the last minute.

  This often came back to bite me on the ass even when I tried countless times to get things squared away early on in the game. Then when there are mistakes made since everything ended up being rushed it is your fault because you didn’t catch them.

  At the same time asking too many questions can result in “you need to take more initiative.” It is especially bad though with the 3d renderings because often times I had to make pre-lim renderings to give the client a taste of what we had to offer. Sometimes the bossess forget that it is a 3dimensional model and the only thing that was designed was the floorplan and front elevation. So they want it last minute and they want you to design all the other elevations with in a couple hours.

• 4 Mel // Dec 23, 2008 at 4:33 pm

  Agree. I’d also like to bring up the fact that 80% of renders are a little (or a lot) of false accusations. People tweek lighting- adding light that will never occur on the building. Walls and windows are removed to a set viewport just to get the moneyshot. This is at least what I have experienced in my education.

• 5 gavin // Feb 13, 2009 at 12:20 am

  The flip side is that you do get a chance to shine and confidence is built in your abilities by both yourself and your employer. If the employer does not let you either give you greater responsibility or some creative input, and wants only a render monkey perhaps it’s time for a change.

• 6 Mark Horner // Feb 20, 2009 at 8:30 am

  Spot on

  When I was fresh out of college, we (3 people) spent weeks modelling a business park, 10,000 polygons. (That is like 10 billion would be these days). Then we went to talk to the kids at Animation College. They said use 1 polygon, map a photoshop scan of the site onto it for the colour, save the scan as greyscale, filter it, use it as a bump map and displace the object. Similar process for textures. Same result in minutes, not days. The trouble is, if all you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail. You need a full tool box.

• 7 Holly // Mar 18, 2009 at 10:41 am

  We’ve been saying this for years but it has become the norm (particularly in the UK) for architects to expect their staff to be trained in 3D. The list of ’skills’ seems endless, but sadly the salary doesn’t measure up.

  I work with my partner where he produces fantastic imagery in very little time. We have experience producing photo-realistic imagery & animation for planning and marketing purposes . We are good at what we do, so please leave it to the professionals..afterall, we leave the designing to you.

  Why can’t architects understand that it’s better to be a specialist in one particular area rather than a jack of all trades, master of none!

• 8 dave // Apr 8, 2009 at 2:56 pm

  So the young kid in my office doing the 3D sent this my way. I ain’t no young architect anymore and I have been doing the 3d thing since someone discovered I could in 1983 or 4. I agree will all your points but experience (or foolishness) prompts the following upsides.

  1. All the interesting bits of architecture are right there on the surface. Let the old fart in the corner try to detail the pretty picture you just drew.

  2. Yes you are up all night 3 nights in a row before the deadline. But then you have several weeks where you can take 3 hour lunches while the client hums and haws. I have seen a lot of matinees doing the 3d.

  3. Since nothing is typically figured out when you start to model, often you become the defacto designer. Now you do a lot of it in a hurry and badly, but you are responsible for the ugly building in the end.

  4. Hanging with the boss may not be all bad. Sure it ain’t the fast track we all envisioned but there are benefits - mentoring, camraderie, and naked access to power.

  5. You don’t ever need to take the damn profession seriously (or its exams). You just do the work not the posturing or the politics.

  6. You never have to dress, wash or behave well. Perfect job if you have an acid tongue, an adversion to water and a bad disposition.

• 9 Marc // Apr 8, 2009 at 5:46 pm

  Dave,

  I applaud any attempt to put a bright spin on things, especially in these times where there isn’t much to be optimistic about.

  Speaking from a little experience on the matter (because I really avoided the 3d stuff once I saw the writing on the wall), offices typically have one or two people that do the modeling, however they usually are also responsible for the other job tasks too including the detailing/ “boring stuff.
  Additionally, the design is often rushed if you are doing it on the fly and can be overly exaggerated to create a desired effect. This method of design is usually a nightmare when converted into reality

  I did often find myself closer to the partner in charge of the project which was nice and I gleaned a lot of knowledge from such interaction. The downside is that more often than not you may disappoint them, as they view 3D modeling as some sort of quick and easy process. Like flicking a few switches and pushing a few buttons. In these situations, the limitations to the modeling process must be made clear to the boss so they can work effectively with you.

  Lastly, it sounds as though David is strictly doing 3d and getting paid for it alone; the “Professional” route. That is precisely what I am suggesting here. If 3d is your thing and you enjoy it, then you should get paid for it accordingly. If it is your only focus, you can build your library, hone your skill-set, and develop an efficient modeling system. It also, allows for you to free-lance during your down-time (that is if there are no movies you would like to see).

• 10 Marc // Apr 8, 2009 at 5:48 pm

  P.S.

  This posting has received the most attention on youngarchitect and the responses have been awesome.

• 11 Chen // Apr 8, 2009 at 11:06 pm

  I cant agree more with this…

  @point 12: Professionals Do It Better

  What is the name of the “professional rendering firm model the entire Dubai Waterfront Development overnight…from scratch.”??

  I’d like to learn about it.

• 12 M2JL :: STUDIO // Apr 10, 2009 at 12:53 am

  I TOTALLY agree. I remember modeling 3D spaces in class. It took FOREVER! It looks nice and all but there’s no way most clients are going to pay for your time remodeling for hours. At the end of the day they want their real space to look nice and to work. Sketches are much better for architects and designer. And in case when 3D rendering are required (marketing, contests, etc.), the experts are the best bet indeed.

• 13 theLAB // Apr 10, 2009 at 4:26 pm

  Unfortunately for the most part, architects are using the computer and 3d modeling to produce an image to sell half baked ideas…3d Modeling & rendering is a tool for design, if your on the business end of the tool you missed an opportunity.

• 14 renderMonkey // Apr 10, 2009 at 6:35 pm

  12 reasons to refuse to do architectural work:
  1. You Will Lose Track of Time:
  2. More Demands on Your Time
  3. The Employer Doesn’t Have Knowledge of whatever Technique you use
  4. You Will Find Yourself Re-doing Things Over and Over
  5. You Have to Sweat the Details
  6. You Are On Your Own: No One Else Can Help You
  7. You May Have Knowledge in One method but not another
  8. You Lose Your Personal Space
  9. You Won’t Be Working on Important Tasks
  !0. You Will Learn Less
  11. You Will Be Under-appreciated
  12. Others Do It Better

  the reason i like architecture is because it is easy, takes no time, doesn’t require sweating the details. Basically, it makes itself! so great!

• 15 Deacon // Apr 10, 2009 at 9:00 pm

  If you want to become a CAD monkey, why did you go to architecture school? You could have gone to ITT Tech or something….

  Those of us who went to real architecture school have the need to express and communicate brilliant ideas, and good renderings are some of the compelling ways of doing so.

  It’s not the rendering that’s under-appreciated and consumes a lot of your time. It’s the profession itself. If you chose to become an architect for quick and easy money with lots of praises…… well, sucks to be you.

• 16 Henry // Apr 11, 2009 at 4:47 am

  What ever happen to the set of prismacolors? The other day the dirrector of architecture at my school said it to the point: getting a job is becoming dependent on how long the list of programs you know. I hope this isn’t in my future because I have yet to use cad on a project, and don’t really have an urge to. I’m taking a class on 3ds max now and its alright as an exploration tool for daylight and such, but it just takes too long figuring out mapping materials, and like everyone has said making changes so I rather not use it for presentation purposes. I rather draw and render by hand.

• 17 new arch viz blog - 3DAllusions - Visualizing Possiblities! // Apr 11, 2009 at 7:41 am

  [...] on archinect recently about someone arguing for architects to leave the ‘rendering’ to the pros! 12 Reasons to Refuse to Render! | YOUNG ARCHITECT I’m doing what I’m doing these days because it took me 4 years to realize that the list was all [...]

• 18 Peter Guthrie // Apr 11, 2009 at 7:58 am

  As someone who spent far too long doing the 3d thing for an architecture firm before going freelance, I agree with every point on your list, especially number 12!

  Incredibly, architects who do have these skills in house often don’t charge their clients extra! Thats a practice that really doesn’t help anyone.

• 19 daniel // Apr 11, 2009 at 3:06 pm

  As a young designer at my firm, I am responsible for animations and renderings at my very large firm. I am strongly opposed to most of the points you made. I take initiative in the work that I do. I stand behind the design decisions that I am forced to make when modeling, which allows me to present myself as a project designer rather than a modeling slave. I am now treated with equal respect. It seems people are inclined to forfeit their opinions during intensive production work. Really it is a position that provides a lot of opportunity.

  As far at practical issues of time and detailing. Being a REVIT user has given me TONS of exposure to detailing and design in almost every phase. I challenge you to find me information that shows 2d cad drafting is more effective/efficient than BIM modeling in any way.

• 20 Gabriel Navarro // Apr 11, 2009 at 7:09 pm

  With more and more parametric modelling softwares making it’s way into the AEC industry, 3d modelling and rendering has become a lot less time consuming, with my recent switch to Revit, all of my workload that I used to have with other CAD softwares such as AutoCad, ADT, etc. have been reduced in half, last minute changes to the model are basically seemless, so you can really spend time focusing on the project and not just on the presentation. I think more architects are really feeling identified with the work process that parametric softwares convey to the AEC industry, so this 3d modelling/rendering burden that some and most of us used to carry will be greatly alleviated.

• 21 swerv21 // Apr 11, 2009 at 7:57 pm

  this is such a wrongheaded post.

  one of the problems with the profession is the outsourcing to ‘professionals’.

  spec writers do it better- farm it out to them.

  contractors have to figure it out anyway, let them do the work.

  owners reps are responsible for protecting the owner- let them do it.

  the engineers are supposed to work the structure out anyway- leave it to them.

  the rendering can be done faster and cheaper in china can’t it? leave it to them.

  meanwhile, the space left for you- the architect gets smaller and smaller. your fee is diminishes with every ‘professional’ you hire and your ability to challenge the ‘professionals’ and produce something that hasn’t died from a thousand paper cuts is, at best, proscribed.

  you, the architect, have the responsibility to master the media. you are paid to represent compelling ideas. farming that function out to someone else is like a book critic using cliffs notes.

  if you are going to be any good at something, you are going to have to learn to do things that other people can’t.

• 22 12 Reasons to refuse to Render! | Arch Daily // Apr 11, 2009 at 9:00 pm

  [...] Joseph, from Young Architect, has written a post about one of those tasks you should try to avoid at all cost in order to make [...]

• 23 g // Apr 12, 2009 at 1:52 am

  I was in this situation. Rendering other people’s projects. But in doing the rendering I ended up cleaning up the design - realizing it - improving it to such an extent that in the end it was basically my design. My bosses noticed that. Now I’m the one doing the designs. I still end up doing the renderings too. As I can do them in two days and they do express my intent, better than trying to coordinate with renderers in china with broken english! So I say, do the renderings but use that as a way to improve the design of your boss. Leave your mark.

• 24 i hire people to render // Apr 12, 2009 at 3:55 am

  well, yes, you are totally right,
  and i am a grad from one of the top schools.
  you know why i dont need to use autocad? because i hire people to do it for me.

• 25 Patrick // Apr 12, 2009 at 5:07 am

  A big problem is that more and more students are experts in computersoftware like autocad and rendering software but dont know anything about Architecture. Computers are just a tool, like a pencil.

• 26 David // Apr 12, 2009 at 5:20 am

  I actually use AutoCad for 3d modeling. For an architect (if you’re not working on BLOBs) it’s an ideal tool. but, for the rendering export to 3ds max is unavoidable..

• 27 Jonathon // Apr 12, 2009 at 5:38 am

  better still. do it, say you think you are not the best person for the task and fail to deliver.

  see how often you get asked again

• 28 12 Reasons to Refuse to Render | Wildly Appropriate // Apr 12, 2009 at 8:29 am

  [...] reading this posting at Young Architect with much interest vis-a-vis my book project Tags: Marc Joseph, NTISI, Regular Old Architecture [...]

• 29 David // Apr 12, 2009 at 11:17 am

  totally agree!

• 30 rob // Apr 12, 2009 at 1:15 pm

  I think most of these points are in some way valid (and amusing), however I have found that my strengths in visualization have led to me getting to design schemes and be involved in their conception rather than detailing them. Frankly I’d much rather spend most of my days at work designing, visualizing schemes and hopefully winning competitions than worrying about window and door schedules. Honestly “billable” work = not fun work.

• 31 estudiantes_de_arquitectura_cl // Apr 12, 2009 at 1:18 pm

  [...] materialentrega 1 pintura 12 razones de porque no deberiamos renderear Young Architect nos da 12 razones de porque no deberiamos renderear en nuestro primer trabajo de oficina. En eda.cl hemos discutido este tema en profundidad y ya no [...]

• 32 12 Reasons to refuse to Render! - Style of Design // Apr 13, 2009 at 2:20 am

  [...] Joseph, from Young Architect, has written a post about one of those tasks you should try to avoid at all cost in order to make [...]

• 33 12 Reasons to refuse to Render! « Rants on modernism // Apr 13, 2009 at 10:14 am

  [...] Joseph, from Young Architect, has written a post about one of those tasks you should try to avoid at all cost in order to make [...]

• 34 adamk // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:15 am

  Yes, this is why I left architecture to start a pro render business 10 years ago. Per #12 = We have a team of pro modelers, a library of resources, a 60+ core render farm, and a streamlined process as the result of 10 yrs of practice. Check out our work: studio2a.net visualize!

• 35 Matt M. // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:30 am

  Bravo to the twelve reasons! It should not be left unsaid, however, that all hours should be billable. The unfortunate truth is that this is easier said than done! As an independent landscape designer, in perhaps the worst location in the country (Detroit), I am continually faced with competitors who charge nothing for their design services. All of the sales expertise in the world cannot convince most clients that these free drawings will not match the quality or creativity of mine. My industry has lessened the value of true artists while turning many of us into non-caring, paid-by-commission salespeople. Imagine, if you can, being paid only if you are able to sell the construction end of what you have spent countless hours designing. In a ridiculously competetive market, where the big-box mentality of clients has them believing that the product is the same no matter the price, one had better be representing the cheapest bidder if he wants to eat! Even I have taken to using Sketchup and other 3d modeling programs to supplement my plan views. There is little or no appreciation given by clients for the extra time involved but my hope is that this tool will help to increase my sales in our dismal market.

• 36 D // Apr 13, 2009 at 1:08 pm

  This seems to be a talking about heavier model/render software live Viz, which I’ve stayed away from for all the reasons listed above. My experience as a sketch-up user have been completely different, however.

  Even as a young designer, just 3 years out of school, I find I’m driving the design process, not reacting to it.

  I agree with G, you’ve got to add value, not just be a render monkey. Its a wonderful opportunity to get into the big-picture design phase if you can take advantage.

• 37 Karl Brown // Apr 13, 2009 at 5:11 pm

  It’s interesting to see how people are split on the issue; people are rightly defending both sides. To me the biggest problem with 3D visualisation is as Patrick has stated, that it should be a ‘tool’ but too often the ‘tool’ leads the craftsmen rather than the other way around.

• 38 ianchristopher // Apr 13, 2009 at 6:08 pm

  I find your blog to lack any amount of credibility and consider you to be simply lazy due to the fact that you “call in sick to work to attend sporting events.” Does your employer know this? Give it up…you’re a disgrace to the profession…

• 39 fishtnk // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:35 pm

  Keep an open mind architects … this discussion is very project specific and we should understand that as architects we “represent” the ideas of what one considers architecture. The medium being digital models, 2B sketches or cardboard models is up to the architect to find the most effective way to represent what he/she needs to communicate with the clients, colleagues, professors or just a regular guy walking down the street.
  3D rendering could benefit the design process by capturing a key elements and moments in digital design or miscommunicate and limit the architect’s design process from that point on. Modeling/rendering and parametric analysis are just methods that the user [we are almost at a point that the user is the designer] represents his/her design intentions. This process would benefit from the users experience but no matter how professional or amateur you are will be a quite unique and personal execution.
  Of course softwares change constantly and each software is better for one thing but sucks for the other, this is similar to the non-digital ways to represent architecture:
  Pencil is good for sketching , rapidograph is good for detailed drawings [while a T-square, a very hi-tech piece of technology, helps the accuracy of your drawing] and water color is good for abstract facade represenations or perspectives ; in digital realm Rhino is good for modeling 3DS is good for rendering and animation and maya is great for simulations and dynamic studies. Also we are just starting to really use and take advantage of digital technologies in the profession[autodesk was founded in 1982.] As architects we must actively participate in the development of these new tools and keep an open mind. It is almost ignorant to deny the contributions of 3D-modeling and rendering to the world of architecture and not see how much we have accelerated the design process with the help these new gadgets.

• 40 Pat B // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:45 pm

  I have to say this article is the worst thing I have read in a long time about what it is to be a young professional. The position of entitlement from which these complaints are made is irresponsible and will delay advancement in a professional setting rather than advance it. I’ll take this point by point.
  1. God forbid the day passes by while you are engaged in a task that is so captivating your whole day passes by. It sunny outside too.
  2. Is this a serious comment? Are you not paid for your time?
  3. That’s you chance to shine. It’s probably one of the only things a young architect is better at than their boss. Changes to the work are the same as redlining CD’s, what’s the problem?
  4. That’s called a design process.
  5. Understanding how a building goes to gather and occupies its site are the two most important things any architect can learn. You don’t work out the details because your client can not suspend their disbelief; you work them out because that’s what separates an architect from a hobbyist. Sweating the details, be it a rendering or CD’s, is the task a young architect needs to learn and ingrain in their process for any work they may undertake.
  6. That’s just not true. Maybe someone doesn’t know the software or compatible software but there are so many things that go into a rendering it rarely comes out of one program ready to go. One rendering can have numerous tasks shared by a team of people.
  7. Wait. You had to learn something new? That’s just unfair. It’s so hard, really. Good point.
  8. The smell of their breath? How about saying ‘I’ll make these changes right away, come back in 10 minutes and I’ll show what I got’. Or continue with the cuddies argument.
  9. The skill to illustrate your idea is an important one. Would you rather review those detail references you’re sweating or coordinate a finish hardware spec or count sheets or pick up redlines for the third time? If you can’t appreciate the process of making pretty pictures you’re really missing a beautiful part of creating the physical expression of architecture.
  10. You are missing the point of the 3d modeling task. You learn how the building engages it site, how 2d drawings translate into 3d form, major structural systems, landscaping, understanding of basic civil issues, finish selection, not to mention vetting conceptual design and figuring out what works and what doesn’t.
  11. That’s just not true. Even the oldest boss remembers the time it takes to render in graphite, pen or colored pencil.
  12. If someone can do something better then you, it’s just not worth doing.
  I hope someone has the good sense to delete this whole editorial.

• 41 Dailycious 12.04.09 « cendres.net // Apr 14, 2009 at 9:02 am

  [...] 12 Reasons to Refuse to Render! | YOUNG ARCHITECT architecture workflow 3d No comments yet. [...]

• 42 Jeremy // Apr 14, 2009 at 9:44 am

  LOL @ renderMonkey

• 43 Maurits // Apr 15, 2009 at 5:07 pm

  I think Pat B mixes rendering with modeling. Excellent post Marc. Thanks.

• 44 un6.org | 12 Reasons to Refuse to Render! | ~/stud // Apr 18, 2009 at 6:15 pm

  [...] z youngarchitect.net (doposud nehodnoceno)  Loading … « NU architectuuratelier: ORDOS 100 [...]

• 45 Ninjas on the ‘Net at AMNP // Apr 20, 2009 at 11:40 am

  [...] 12 reasons not to render, a must read for intern-architects everywhere [via Young [...]

• 46 Samantha B // Apr 20, 2009 at 11:14 pm

  Pat B…
  I’ve got to reply to your post as another “young architect” to point out a few things from my experience that contrast yours.
  Point 1- I’ve only had a handful of days in my experience where only one task has to be done. Having a task that gets you lost puts you behind in other tasks, and can lead to going past deadlines if you’re not careful.
  2- as a matter of fact, no! My position is an intern, and as such, I do NOT get paid for overtime. Nor do my salaried co-workers.
  3 and 4- In the more intense 3d rendering programs, it is much more time consuming to re-work or change things. Rendering is supposed to be used as a final presentation tool, and so the programs are often not built to make post-editing very easy to do, and major changes take massive amounts of time.
  5- Your point is very true, but it must be said that working out details in a model often go right alongside drawing up the details in CAD (o.eq.), and that just means that you’re doing these details twice…again, time consuming, and something that you’d never have to do in a hand rendering to this level.
  6- Again, you have a point. In my first firm, however, I was the only one who knew how to run SketchUp or 3ds max, and therefore really was on my own for the entire thing. It’s a pain, and although it’s happening less and less as more firms are learning these programs, I’ve still seen other classmates enter a job and run into the same hurdle in those firms.
  7- Yes, you do have to learn new things, and no, you shouldn’t complain when you do. It does become a problem when you are expected to jump right in and go when the chosen program is in no way related to the ones you’re used to. I took years to learn 3ds well, and there’s absolutely no way that my coworkers could learn it quickly enough if we decided to use that program on a current project. Again, this goes back to #6…
  8- Sometimes saying that works, sometimes it doesn’t. My current boss? MAJOR hoverer, and usually it’s just because he doesn’t know what exactly I’m doing to make these changes and is constantly going “no, no, what are you doing? why can’t you just do this?” and then I’ve got to explain why it has to be done a certain way…this does completely depend on the type of boss, though.
  9 and 10- I actually totally agree with you on this. It’s just something to watch out for, that you’re not stuck as the renderer on every project while everyone else is participating in specs, codes, redlines etc.- it’s easy to fall into that trap, and you can really fall behind overall by doing that.
  11- Hopefully!
  12- Honestly, I completely back up the choice to hire a professional renderer. If nobody in the firm is an expert at rendering, then that’s always a better choice than wasting the firm’s time and the client’s money attempting to make something that looks good when the pros can do it ten times faster and better. If, however, you’ve hired somebody on just for that purpose, then by all means use them! Just don’t expect every fresh-out graduate who learned to render digitally to be able to produce work at the professional renderer’s level. It just isn’t going to happen.

  I loved this article- rings true for me!

• 47 avril2009 // Apr 21, 2009 at 5:51 pm

  3d rendering:

  1: convey an idea to the best possible.
  2: test an idea/ building before it is built.

  We don’t make professional hand drawings anymore, it used to be a way to express our intentions (imagine all the time frank Lloyd wright’s pupils took to draw these pain in the ass perspectives by hand). We use laser cutters and rapid prototypers more and more instead of doing all by hand.

  Welcome to 2009.

  Today, we take time to make these renders and more and more, it is possible to render with pre-selected settings so you don’t have to adjust again and again, each and every time.

  To those who take 3 weeks to make a good render: you are not in 2009. There are ways to make mind blowing renders once you use the right tools with the right settings.

  To those who think that 3d modelling is a “waste of your precious intellectual time” : it is a way to understand how things are built and I believe it forms your spatial understanding. I personally wouldn’t have come up with certain spatial solutions if it wasn’t that I was working them digitally. It’s a way to solve problems rapidly and precisely in some cases. Like someone else mentioned, Revit helps. Now for the first time in decades, we see electricity and mechanics in 3d whereas we always saw them in 2d. I hope you all understand how powerfully this changes building design.

  On another note, Just as graphic design is important in our field, I believe, because it is our way to express our thoughts, quality 3d renders are just as important. I don’t think that sketchup renders show that you have an acute sense of the future and of what can be made and done with today’s technologies.

  If as an architect you want to make the best building possible and you are a perfectionist, you will want to have renders that convey and verify the plausibility of your convictions.

  I worked for a big firm where it took me a lot of time to make the renders they wanted. But now it takes me 2 days to represent my ideas in a clear and professional way where as some people would take 2 months.

  Live and learn.

• 48 Monographs and Architecture Education // Apr 22, 2009 at 2:37 pm

  [...] like those studios where you have to use this or that software.  Which reminds me, I saw this post on what architects in training should avoid doing at all costs in their early [...]

• 49 Jim Hutchison // Apr 29, 2009 at 1:47 am

  I love your blog, but reading the post and the comments confused me a bit. Why would you not want to hone a skill that gives your collaborative muscle a workout? I understand that making renderings is work - and sometimes it might seem like it’s tedious work - but how can you expect to clearly communicate ideas without some kind of three-dimensional representation?

  I’m a lighting designer, and I could not imagine showing up for a meeting with only a 2D light plot and saying “hey, it’s gonna be lit.”

  Don’t you want to have the ability to walk into a job interview and say “Rendering? I’m awesome at rendering. Here’s a sample of the breadth of my rendering work.” The posters here who have commented on rendering and honing a design are right; experience makes you wise.

• 50 An Architect’s Perspective On Rendering? | Jim On Light // Apr 29, 2009 at 11:13 am

  [...] just read a post at Young Architect about rendering - more specifically, the article was stating that rendering is something that [...]

• 51 Are you a mac monkey? | News Junkie // Apr 29, 2009 at 12:50 pm

  [...] Here are Young Architect’s twelve reasons to refuse to render [...]

• 52 Oscar Rottink // Apr 29, 2009 at 2:59 pm

  I just ran across this blog and it’s view. It (and some of the replies) remind me about the fact that Art Directors at our advertising company in the early days refuse to sit behind a computer and use it for their work.

  12 years later they understand it can make your work better, and impress a client more then you could ever have done using the markers and a piece of paper. And of course you could explain your idea to a graphic designer and let him do the work behind a computer. But think it’s the same with architects, it will never be perfect at once. And in the end you loose lots of time telling the graphic designer what to do.

  So modelling may be time consuming, I think knowing it’s possibilities can give your quality of work an extra boost.

  I wonder how about 10-12 years architects feel about this same topic and if they still think staying with the more traditional way of doing their work will still fit anno 2019. And no, I’m no architect, though I love great buildings

• 53 Notícias de Arquitectura // Apr 30, 2009 at 9:17 am

  I TOTALLY desagree.

  When i finished my architecure course, we did our works making models by hand over and over until the project was good enought.

  In the last two years of my graduation we started to making digital models what in some how was good because we had more time to finish the drawings.

  What i want to say is that i think it’s good for the practice of young architects the process of making and remaking a 3d model to understand the work of space, proportions and light like we did in the past, making and remaking models to look for the spaces we project.

  When we see the final result of a ghery model or zahadid or even the first models of corbusier and wright we just see the final result and we have to bilieve that this is a result of making and remaking over and over the same model.

• 54 Mark // May 1, 2009 at 6:04 pm

  3d modellin makes poor projects look better than they really are! I’ve seen fellow students basically falsify renders in order to make their scheme work (in digital space). One example which was actually built didnt look anywhere near as impressive because the lighting was “fudged” in 3dsMax and the actual working details were glossed over by flashy imagery. Unfortunately the public are swayed by realistic renders of pretty poor architecture.

• 55 JoeS. // May 4, 2009 at 12:17 pm

  Not being an architect at all, but a visualization artist I have to laugh at the 12 reasons given. Reason 12 states that hiring a professional to do the job is the best bet which I truly believe and not because I work at a visualiztion firm, but because that is what we do as a career. Saying that an image can take as little as a day or two clearly shows that you aren’t expecting a high quality image, but a quick turn-around at a low cost. I feel that you are going to get what you pay for. Paying $500 for an image with a two day turn-around is exactly that. I feel that too many people think that because they “know” SketchUp or worked with some 3D software for a few semesters that they are entitled to creating renderings. I respect architects that know their craft but the same should go for illustrators that create the masterpieces for that architect.

• 56 Architecture Student // May 4, 2009 at 2:22 pm

  to start, i’m an architecture student, in my first year. before, i went to a high school specializing on computer programming. this translated into the fact that out of 100 fellow students, only 1 other can already create realistic renderings.
  my point however is that no matter how good my renderings are compared to my colleagues, at the end of the day, it’s still the design that is being judged and graded. i think that 3d modelling is currently the most powerful and productive tool we have as architects. renderings are a different story though. quick ones for lighting studies or material studies are alright to use, but let the visualisation artists make your final rendering for presentations. they’re called artists for a reason. this way, architects get to spend their time designing and not tweaking lighting rigs and other rendering bottlenecks.

• 57 nic ceron // Jun 13, 2009 at 10:01 am

  thanks. True. 3d modelling has complicated things. by over-use, and abuse.
  The tool is great. But seriously, if all you really needed in life is to “impress” a client so that he/she buys a product you sell, you should set up an ad agency instead.
  I think that expectations from employers should stop at the ,say- sketchup- level. And then move on to important tasks of actual architectural design and; outsource the details. In an intuitive way I think that Digital 3d modelling is for people who don’t know how to draw.
  Architecture is not visual.
  Buying into what your architect proposes may be.
  But if you are going to limit your practice to what your client is able to -see- on a photo-rendering… your work will hover around a two dimensional axis. And when the time comes to build structural details, wall sections, etc… the project will suffer.

Leave a Comment