How much should I charge for an animation?

Most artists are mediocre at best, especially when starting out, and they can’t necessarily “just up their skills”. Again, to even become good you have survive up to that point. I’d rather suggest to look for more boring clients that don’t require as much artistic skill. Many clients literally can’t tell the difference anyway.

Also, where do these artists live? Average income in Slovenia is half that of the UK. I’ve seen great work from artists in even cheaper countries, as well, working at pretty low rates.

Our business has been going since 2003 and is well established, I’ve no reason to try and move into the world of 3D as a career, but that doesn’t mean if someone comes along asking me to do what I enjoy in my spare time as a paid gig that I’m going to turn it down.

Charging for creative services is the same across all it’s forms but certain areas are less available than others. The average person can shop around for a web designer, they could find hundreds in a relatively small area and would be looking to get a good deal merely based on price. However if they were looking for an App developer they probably wouldn’t have a clue if that developer was just plugging widgets together or creating something entirely bespoke.

10 years ago if you knew how to use a CAD package or program a website you were seen as highly skilled, nowadays there are so many people who are ‘designers’ using Adobe CC and banging out Wordpress websites that the mystique as been removed along with it’s value. 3D production still seems to be one that is beyond the reach of your average designer and hence why it’s value is a bit of a mystery to me.

I kind of doubt that there is a reliable “struggling 3D artist” statistic available.

To me 3D doesn’t appear to be significantly different than other jobs. You have to acquire a certain amount of skill to be able to become a professional just like in plenty of other jobs. The same is true for painters of course but there is a much larger demand for 3D artists than painters because 3D is needed in multi billion dollar industries such as the car and advertising industry.

Comparing 3D jobs to painters can be misleading to people just starting out just as well.

Accepting a massively underpaid job can be worse than not accepting the job at all because if you are occupied with fulfilling a job for peanuts you won’t be able to search for or accept other jobs that might pay better. Furthermore, depending on the job, it is very possible that you won’t learn that many new skills whereas using the time for actively practising and developing new skills practically guarantees you to increase your skill set. Actually accepting underpaid jobs is quite a common mistake for people starting out in my experience.

Also, where do these artists live? Average income in Slovenia is half that of the UK. I’ve seen great work from artists in even cheaper countries, as well, working at pretty low rates.

A lot clients don’t want to outsource jobs to other countries for several reasons. One very important one is that in the 3D industry you often handle classified data which they may not or don’t want to send out via internet.

Regarding the original question:
Figuring out how to set a good price is pretty difficult and requires a lot of experience which beginners don’t have.
In theory of course you simply multiply your daily rate by the days you expect to require for the project. Estimating the latter is very difficult, though.
Personally I have fared well with doing an estimation and then quadrupling the time because every project comes with unexpected things and worse than claimed source material.
Another important things is to make it clear that if the client wants changes along the road he will have to pay for them. You can agree on a fixed set of changes beforehand but it has to be clear that changes take time and cost money. Most clients are understanding about that if you tell them beforehand but might be annoyed if you tell them later on.

offtopic: i don’t want to state the obvious, but Van Gogh is considered a pretty good artist today, and yet barely sold a single painting while still alive.

Their budget is nearly 100x too low. Do everyone in the industry a favor and tell them to get real or get lost. Even if you only value your time at $10/hr (exceedingly low for good animation) that would buy them a small fraction of what they’re asking for.

In short: What Beer Baron said.

I do both traditional design and (lately) 3D stuff, and I’ve been doing design for more years than I care to remember.

So. in terms of pricing: What’s your hourly rate? Mine is approx. 100 euros an hour, but I live in a high cost land, and your rate may be different. Nevertelles, you should stil have one, and that’s were it has to start. If something takes me three hourd to finish, it’s 300 €. I don.t undercut myself, and I don’t lower the baseline for other 3D artists. Neither should you, even if you lose an occasional job.

Well yeah I think most of us started doing this as a hobby if you go back far enough. I don’t think the good people started with the idea of making money right off the bat.

There is nothing wrong with doing something as a hobby and then getting paid for it eventually. My advice was just practical advice regarding starting this as a business. And you may not see it this way. But it very definitely applies to what you are talking about.

If does not matter if your hobby continues on for the next 10 years and you improve as you go, or if you take on clients along the way. Either way you are going to get paid based on what you can show you can produce and the clients you attract. And that will change over time. It will get better. What you are willing to charge for something as a hobby is completely up to you. Obviously. And it is entirely possible to get a client who will pay you want you want for your services now. But as a general rule, a predictable rule, pay will be equal to skill, if you now how to find the right clients and stick to your guns. So really not saying anything new here that you don’t know. You know this from your business. Right?

The technology side is a factor. But not as big as I think you have been making it. I mean if your question was centered around technology. It has not really changed things that much when it comes to doing animated projects. There are no real magic bullets. MOCAP data is probably the most distinct difference technologically speaking. All of the other aspects suffer from the same problems, higher technology breeds higher expectations or which ever way you see that chicken and egg proposition.

Another thing that is changing is real time rendering. But again this also suffers from the same thing. As real time gets better so does traditional rendering and the demands there. So it is an endless cycle.

I’m not comparing the jobs, I’m pointing out the fallacy in your reasoning. It is evident that your opinion is biased from your professional experience. You’ve been doing this for over a decade and your clients are from cars and advertising, you have a professional portfolio reflecting that and you have the client contacts. You’re established in that niche.

It works for you, but that doesn’t mean any artist can just break into that field with whatever they got going for them. A lot of the portfolios I see are all over the place (like that of Richard Culver- no offense) and they tell “I’m an artist!”. Your professional work doesn’t really qualify as art. That’s why I say there’s more money (and jobs) in boring work, rather than the places where seemingly everybody wants to be (modeling monsters and robots).

It would be useful if you could tell people how you started out (even though that was long ago), instead of just saying “this is wrong, you can make good money!”. Some artists can make good money.

Accepting a massively underpaid job can be worse than not accepting the job at all because if you are occupied with fulfilling a job for peanuts you won’t be able to search for or accept other jobs that might pay better. Furthermore, depending on the job, it is very possible that you won’t learn that many new skills whereas using the time for actively practising and developing new skills practically guarantees you to increase your skill set. Actually accepting underpaid jobs is quite a common mistake for people starting out in my experience.

I’m not saying “accept everything”, I’m saying “do what you’re comfortable with”. It can be better to accept an underpaid job and at least get some client experience and some money out of it. People starting out also tend to overestimate themselves, so a job may not even look underpaid at first. Again, important experience.

The “you could spend time looking for a job argument” is kind of bogus, there’s only so many jobs and there’s diminishing returns. Doing professional work is a skill in and of itself, which you should practice. Of course you can always improve your skills doing your own work, but if it’s all the same monsters and spaceships and the clients you could get are looking for product visualization, that’s not necessarily helpful.

A lot clients don’t want to outsource jobs to other countries for several reasons. One very important one is that in the 3D industry you often handle classified data which they may not or don’t want to send out via internet.

That doesn’t surprise me when it comes to german car manufacturers. In many other places though, outsourcing to Asia has become commonplace (this includes Hollywood!).

I love this thread sooo much.
I remember back on cgtalk 10 years ago someone using the same figure of $100 per second of animation.
Sooo true considering whats involved , lights ,camera paths ,texturing, modeling, render time , and more important the knowledge and ability to be able to do the animation.

I’ve turned down a lot of jobs because they had no clue and would not listen to why.

The only problem is you can not mix animation time with modeling work in an estimate. I mean you can try and cost it out that way. I have tried to work that law of averages but it is a poor way to calculate. Experience and tens of thousands of US Dollars of clients money and several years later I have learned it does not work. Not to either party’s benefit.

And since this thread is really about, “How much something should cost?”, then I think it is worth mentioning.

The only way to do a budget is to itemize. It is absolutely the only way. This is how all budgeting is done in professional circles. Film and animation is no different.

There is no way to toss out figures in a blanket way, or to try and estimate averages per second.

You can say, well, the budget is X.

But if you are going to do that you then have to work it backwards and itemize.

However with that said, there are some things you can not itemize. Just impossible. And a classic example is dynamics and in some ways rendering even. Particle effects and other dynamics are almost always experimental in nature, at least to some degree, regardless of your experience.

But other things like modeling and textures and animation can and should be itemized based on complexity.

So you can have a complexity rating for modeling and animation, you know maybe 3 stages.

One artist who works in my studio on an average can do a very complex robotic character in say 3-4 weeks start to finish with sculpting retopo and textures. So I’d have a different rate for that of course than a simple cartoon character.

But regardless of how you come about a price. You have to itemize and put a cost to everything. Every prop, character, set etc. It all has to have a price. And the client needs to agree up front or you are headed for disaster.

And then animation can be rated by complexity and an average per second is fine, per level of complexity.

But here is the catch. You have to have years of experience doing this. Or you will fail at itemizing.

You don’t have to do this working for clients. You could do it on your own. But you have to be disciplined and time yourself. Then you have to put a figure on what your time is worth. Some people only work by the hour.

But there is a problem with that. Very few clients will just hire you and accept your hourly rate without some kind of idea of an overall budget. That is just a poor way to do business and you won’t find a client who is willing to pay your wage who is not also diligent about money and also not concerned about an overall deadline or per item budget. I had a client paying me by the hour but we did it and calculated it it once through on a model. After that it was determined that my rate and speed was adequate and we continued on in that way because there were several things that needed modeling. And they were all at varying degrees of complexity and thus final cost. And the range of complexity was fairly wide from model to model.

And after doing that for several months I had a record of cost and could evaluate the models by complexity and could then just simply give them a flat rate for the work by looking at the model.

But that was with a lot of experience.

So unless you have a track record. And/or are keeping track like I do with my modelers in the studio, now, there is no way to actually itemize.

You can’t do it truthfully and honestly. And in my case I have a tendency to underestimate. I think a lot of people have that flaw. And well. I am one of them… lol

But anyways, for all of the above reasons and more, I always advocate that people get out there and just get going.

And experience is invaluable. You can not put a price on that. Mistakes and screw ups are even more invaluable as places to gain knowledge. You can’t screw up if you are so careful that you never do anything.

It is the usual mistake of experienced professionals to give out advice based on their level of experience and years on the job. Usually they forget how they got there. Or at least don’t take that into account when advising.

The bottom line is that only you can have the experiences you have and learn from them. And only you can determine what something is worth. And only you can value your time. Is it worth experience? Or is it worth money?

It is a huge miscalculation and almost a sign of competition I expect, when people advise on money alone. And try to say that charging less than a certain amount somehow taints the field. I think the translation to that is. “Back off buddy! You are my competition!”

In reality the only thing that changes the marketplace are factors larger than what individual artists are willing to charge or not charge or willing to put a value on their time. This has little to no effect on the market.

Things that change the market are larger factors to do with banks, economies, exchange rates, supply and demand, technology and so on.

Additionally there are many levels of markets. Some companies are only going to hire from a selected pool of artists that have a preset level of qualification as well as outstanding portfolios. And it is a razor sharp competitive field.

So you are either in that labor pool or you are not. What you do and don’t do will not effect the pricing in that pool anyway.

But there are a wide plethora of markets and industry and use of 3D. And therefore also a fairly wide plethora of potential workforce sources.

And again competition is stiff here. Clients foolish enough to take lower bids from artists who claim they can do it on the cheap and price you out of a job. That fails pretty much most of the time. I have seen it. And I have gotten clients back tail between the legs after.

But the other side of it is if you need to advance and you can take a job that pays less, and you need the experience you can take it knowing well that you are not taking work from another artist because frankly the client won’t pay them. They’ll just find a fool to do it… lol. But you can be a “fool” and learn from it too. If you need that. But do excellent work for your portfolio.

So it is safe to say that you as an artist can choose your path, and charge whatever you feel you need to at any given stage of your career and also to evaluate experience against money and the value of your time.

The factual truth of the matter is if you don’t evaluate that, you will never advance, or if you reach a level and stop doing that, you will stagnate. You will stay at the level you are. To me, staying at a certain level is like dying a slow death. If nothing else inflation and other market factors will get you eventually. So you have to constantly advance. And to do that you have to take risks, you have to be willing to pick and choose when is the right time to sacrifice. And when is the right time to hold the line.

The choice is yours.

I was replying to to your statement that there are “many” starving 3D artists out there and therefore is a terrible career choice. If you have some sort of statistic comparing the numbers of unemployed/poor/broke 3D artists out there to the number of unemployed/poor/broke people with other types of educations I’d be genuinely interested.
It is a great career choice if you do it right. And learning how to do 3D right isn’t more difficult than learning how to do other jobs right.

What I meant to say in general is that 3D isn’t that different from other types of jobs. You first need to get some sort of training before you can enter the job market. If you get this training through university, some other type of school or autodidactically doesn’t really matter.
I think our viewpoints don’t really differ that much.

It works for you, but that doesn’t mean any artist can just break into that field with whatever they got going for them. A lot of the portfolios I see are all over the place (like that of Richard Culver- no offense) and they tell “I’m an artist!”. Your professional work doesn’t really qualify as art. That’s why I say there’s more money (and jobs) in boring work, rather than the places where seemingly everybody wants to be (modeling monsters and robots).

Well, art is pretty subjective term. Personally I wouldn’t categorize most hollywood movies as art and neither the monsters and and robots they portray. My work doesn’t contain any art either.
However, the job title “3D artist” is generally applied very broadly to all kinds of 3D related things, so I think it is useful to use a very broad definition.
If you want to argue that there are very few people who can make money with “real art” I’ll happily agree.

You are correct with the more boring work. In fact I have found that what seems boring often turns out as pretty interesting and the other way around. So definately try boring work.

It would be useful if you could tell people how you started out (even though that was long ago), instead of just saying “this is wrong, you can make good money!”. Some artists can make good money.

I went to university to study architecture, gained experience there and did more 3D training autodidactically in the evening hours. As soon as I was good enough I started taking smaller 3D freelance work. Then after graduating I apparently was good enough to become a full time freelancer. I did a fair share of mistakes, such as taking horribly underpaid jobs and learned the hard way that accepting underpaid job offers can be a pretty bad thing. :wink:

I’m not saying “accept everything”, I’m saying “do what you’re comfortable with”. It can be better to accept an underpaid job and at least get some client experience and some money out of it. People starting out also tend to overestimate themselves, so a job may not even look underpaid at first. Again, important experience.

I agree. The problem is that what inexperience people think they are comfortable with and what they really ARE comfortable with are completely different things. Even more so because they will get excited about their first few job offers and will want them really badly.
It is very difficult to estimate the right amount of time you require for a job. Even after years and years of experience I still find that multiplying your initial estimate by 4 will often put you in the right ball park. The fact that you will almost allways take a lot longer than you initially think is an important and very easy lesson to understand. It is very difficult to apply, though, because when getting your first job offers you’ĺl be very eager to take them no matter what and the greed for money and fame will make you act irrationally.

The “you could spend time looking for a job argument” is kind of bogus, there’s only so many jobs and there’s diminishing returns. Doing professional work is a skill in and of itself, which you should practice. Of course you can always improve your skills doing your own work, but if it’s all the same monsters and spaceships and the clients you could get are looking for product visualization, that’s not necessarily helpful.

If you only do monsters and spaceships in an environment where nobody cares for either you’re not doing it right. But there is nothing keeping you from learning product viz or whatever it is that pays in your region.
Looking for different jobs on the other hand is useful. Searching for clients that might want your service is a rather time consuming task. Not all jobs are posted on the social media network of your choice. You can also write emails to companies that you believe might want your service. Finding and contacting these companies requires time and is a pain in the ass but can pay off directly or later on.

That doesn’t surprise me when it comes to german car manufacturers. In many other places though, outsourcing to Asia has become commonplace (this includes Hollywood!).

Car manufacturers are just the most paranoid example.
A lot of other companies are not keen on releasing their CAD data either. Tool manufacturers or consumer electronics and other products you get in contact with if you work for an average advertising studio.

I didn’t say it was a terrible career choice, that depends on what you want and need out of your career. I can tell there’s many “starving artists” (which is a cliché of course) by looking at the profiles, portfolios and rates of artists where I practically know they cannot make a living. I can’t give you a statistic, but what you’d really want to know is how many people who wanted to be 3D artists for a career are forced into other occupations (including unemployment). At least for art school graduates, that amount is very high (not comparing, just pointing this out).

It is a great career choice if you do it right. And learning how to do 3D right isn’t more difficult than learning how to do other jobs right.

The “you’re just doing it wrong” argument is a standard excuse, but then what’s the way to do it right? In other careers, there may be a very straight path to acquiring the right skills and certifications that almost guarantee you employment. You have to factor that risk in, when deciding on a career.

What I meant to say in general is that 3D isn’t that different from other types of jobs. You first need to get some sort of training before you can enter the job market. If you get this training through university, some other type of school or autodidactically doesn’t really matter.

The job market is different, that’s the point! Also, product visualization isn’t the same market as game artwork or character animation or VFX, of course.

I believe our disagreement is that your perception of a “3D artist” is mostly anyone who works with 3D, whereas I see mostly those who do escapist work. You’re looking more at the architecture or industrial design graduate, I’m looking at the “natural creative” or the art/film school or “game design” graduate. If you look at the art in this forum, it’s clear that my perception is the one that dominates. The people want to do those space ships, monsters and robots. Having a career in CG that doesn’t reflect that at all is tantamount to not having a career as an artist.

Otherwise, I think we’re more-or-less on the same page.

The issue I have found is this. It is uncommon to discover customers who comprehend what it takes to create 3D. What’s more, for the most part the ones that don’t comprehend the expenses and endeavors are the ones that are determined around a financial plan. Furthermore, also can for the most part be the ones determined about quality. Furthermore, when you get those, they are the most exceedingly awful of the most exceedingly bad.
http://aumoelcomp.info/125/o.png

Heh, thats probably it. :slight_smile:

And now the conclusion:
Go for boring jobs. They are probably not really boring because once you are engaged enough in 3D it doesn’t matter if you’re shading the lid of a shampoo bottle of a hobgoblins frenulum. They both have in common that they are just some geometry that needs to reflect light in a certain way. The difference is that the shampoo bottle pays the bills while the hobgoblin probably doesn’t. No offence to hobgoblins.

Whoops wrong reply to something else please ignore.

Actually no. That is the wrong formula. That is 180 degrees backwards. The best paying work, is the most challenging and creative.

In fact the exact formula goes - level of creativeness = level of pay.

Second to that is a scale that can be visualized left to right.

Ideas…Work

The further you are to the left of this scale the more money you can stand to make and the less manual labor you have to do. The further you are to the right, the less money you make and the less input you have on the creative aspects of the work. And of course the more manual or even mundane work there is.

The creativeness or the skill of an artist whether he is good or bad or in between, is the main barometer as to how much money he can make. Boring less interesting work, less money. More creative and satisfying the work - more money.

But money is not the target at all. If you are focused on that, you won’t make it. You won’t advance and you’ll never get good. That is not hard to extrapolate.

The people stuck doing the boring work for a living are there because they have not advanced themselves to a higher level. If you are attempting any form of art, commercial, fine art, illustration, whatever, and you are not getting the best work, it is only because you are not doing your best work. Or rather limited by your current level of creativeness.

It is not the type of work you are trying to get. It is the level of creativeness and skill within that particular line of work that you can demonstrate.

That is the only formula you need to worry about when engaging a career. And if you are honest about that with yourself. And if you follow these simple formulas you will be OK.

And if you take the necessary steps to advance your creativeness and also to be willing to demonstrate that creativeness to others you will advance your career.

If you want a successful career. Get more dedicated to your skills and advancement and simply find ways to get more creative.

Being focused on what jobs pay what is the wrong target. If all you ever do is that, you will stagnate. Fact.

Richard, we’re talking about people looking for actual jobs in the real world. The job you are talking about is basically that of a high-end creative director. There’s also only a handful of them in the entire world and these people are very lucky to be where they are. For every one of them, there’s probably 1000 equally talented people that just never get a chance, because there aren’t that many positions available.

Meanwhile, the jobs for the “rest of us”, those jobs you are most likely to get (if you get them at all) are not like that. It just so happens that most of these jobs are on the “boring” end, because most of the work that needs to be done is rather mundane.

But money is not the target at all. If you are focused on that, you won’t make it. You won’t advance and you’ll never get good. That is not hard to extrapolate.
[…]
It is not the type of work you are trying to get. It is the level of creativeness and skill within that particular line of work that you can demonstrate.
[…]
Being focused on what jobs pay what is the wrong target. If all you ever do is that, you will stagnate. Fact.

May I ask you: Can you live off your creative work? For most of us, money isn’t some trinket added to the work we do anyway, it’s a basic requirement.

There is a difference between jobs that ARE boring and SEEM boring. Pesonally I have found that seemingly boring product viz is a lot of fun while seemingly interesting creatures for computer games is impressively boring. It is a preference of course.
Also, the level of pay does not reflect the level of creativity. The car industry offers really well paid jobs that are astoundingly dull and could be done by a half ways decently trained monkey. The also offer more interesting jobs but a lot of work in the car industry is rather, meh.

Well the good news is the things I have said are not anything that the good artists have to be told. Usually people do this on instinct. It is more of a fact of life than it is just some opinion. Interesting discussion none the less.

And not everyone will agree with how I see it. And that is OK. :slight_smile:

Very interesting post, lots of very good advise and reflections.

That being said, animations are taking a very long time to do and if you want it nice, it takes even more time. Skills of the artists is one thing but we feel at MokaStudio that there is a lot of good artists that cannot do their job properly because of what the industry is giving them.

We all agree that animations is art before anything but being able to express your art through computer is really challenging. If you could paint or create your animations as fast as you can on paper, the price of a second would really change. And the money would also go more on your pocket I believe.

Animators would also be able to rise their skills a lot more easily.

I know we are still in beta (and then it’s still free) but we also are struggling to get some constructive feedbacks on our animation software. At the same time we believe we can bring so much to animators getting rid of the rigging and trying to have the best user interface to easily switch between IK, FK etc…

I think this is one reason why it is so expensive and why there is so many artists struggling to start in the industry, the software are not made for animations at all.

Any ways, we are working for you guys and I hope one day it will pay off, rather sooner than later…