VR & 3D For Property Students & Real Estate – Why Stop There?
We heard words in these articles like ‘ immersive, real life, time-saving, cost-saving’ being used and how it will be great for ‘expanding’ marketing and helping consumers ‘get it’.
Here at Number 25, we’re raising a glass thinking why has it taken so long for so many to start coming to the 3D party? But why stop there?
As 3D Interior Design experts, specialising in the residential market we are happy that there is momentum and awareness of the benefits of 3D and VR to the consumer. After all, this is the basis of our business. Our mission is to take unnecessary costs and delays out of the design, construction and interior fitout, therefore protecting our client’s budgets and keeping the excitement in their build.
My ongoing gripe is the reluctance of some, well a lot within the industry, to embrace change.
Architects, for example, will use Revit or AutoCAD in designing a residential home but insist on presenting their client with 2D plans. If they’re lucky, the client may get a rough 3D exterior render on the front cover or a sniff of 3D in the elevations.
There is also very little or no interaction with structural engineers, which invariably lead to clash issues which don’t get found out until you’re on site and construction has started. For the homeowner, not only does this leads to delays, extra labour an increase in materials and variations, it also adds stress to an already stressful process.
Now if it were a commercial development, the process abides by a completely different set of rules.
BIM is king.
Clash control rules.
3D is the norm.
Why? Because the developers want every last cent to work for them, and time/delays = $$$
My immediate thought was, I want every last cent of my money to work for me too, so why can’t I have the same?
I asked that question of the architects who designed our home and others to try and get a balanced response as to why residential construction for individuals was treated differently to commercial or developers.
I needn’t have bothered.
Without fail, every architect that I contacted and asked this question responded with the same answer.
Cost and time to them.
When I dug deeper, it was the knowledge that using BIM means more work for the practice up front, whereas traditional methods as seen on this infographic, mean the bulk of the work is pushed back in the process. This is the most expensive part of the process to work to this model, leaving builders and other trades ripping their hair out, cursing the architects for leaving them to sort the crap out on site with the ‘builder to sort out on site’ tag.
I got pretty annoyed at that. Because it doesn’t have to be like that.
If I had the choice of either paying more up front, or having my build go over budget and be delayed when knowing that BIM and 3D could have saved me $$$$, I would have happily paid more up front.
But when asked, none could actually quantify the increase in upfront costs
I think that architectural practices are missing a trick.
What do you think a client would pay if they had the ability for a client to see their concept design of their new home in 3D – walk through the kitchen, feel if a space is too big or too small, decide if the windows are in the right place? To have structural design and services mapped so that there are no clash issues to cause delays and variations? To then have the interiors finalised using 3D interior design and spatial planning, fully scaled, finishings signed off before they even submit their building consent application?
Now, if you could also then hand over a truly complete building set package to your builder that included a detailed and accurate schedule and quantities of all required materials, with them knowing that clashes and variations have been minimised, what do you think that would be worth to him and the sub-trades? More competitive and accurate pricing? The confidence to go for a fixed price on an architectural build (ok that one might be pushing it) with the client knowing that they won’t be paying for unnecessary materials.
Fewer delays, fewer variations, fewer hidden costs…
To get all of that info, peace of mind, reassurance, and confidence, I’d happily pay double the $40,000 that we paid our architect.
It doesn’t stop there. Use 3D and VR say in planning. Instead of seeing coloured blobs for trees and vegetation on a landscape plan, show it in 3D. How much easier would that make the planner’s and councils’ job if they can ‘see’ the effect your mitigation will really have. How much quicker would consents get approved?
VR for property students and real estate – so why stop there? Any architects that were having their own 3D and VR party and would like to join ours, our door is open – come on in!
About the Author
Leading a team of internationally experienced and qualified interior designers, Michelle Costello is the director of Number25.co.nz, an online provider of the most up-to-date and advanced 3D Interior Design services that saves her clients time and protects their budget
With a following of more than 15,000 + internationally and growing, Michelle and her team will guide you step-by-step to get the interior of your dreams for the budget that you have.