Saturday, April 17, 2010

The *Challenges* of doing "the Landscaper's Challenge"

So... back to "The Landscaper's Challenge" concept, which the HGTV that we all know and love (most of the time) has introduced to us homeowners as a good way to gather competing designs, meticulously and thoroughly thought through by each professional landscape designer, as sort of a reality show that we could host on our own dining room table, as a way to select and award the "best desginer."  Well, there are definitely a few problems with that concept....
 
1.  Sometimes the "landscaper's challenge" brings the TMI factor, the "too much information" for you to consider in the process, with a lot of the information or ideas getting thrown out, which results in some uneccessary expenditures of everyone's time involved.  In addition to the designer's time, this definitely includes your own precious time.  Every design has options to consider, and now you will be factoring these options x 2, 4, or 6, or more!  How much time do you really want to waste thinking over and factoring in some mediocre to bad options that could be included, that will ultimately need to get thrown out for better options, with too many options now muddling up the decision.

2.  The "TMGI" factor.  The "too many good ideas" problem that also might come out of this will cause the client to want to combine and synergize several design ideas into one project, often to the level where the design turns into a mish-mash.  Again, every great feature doesn't always belong within one landscape.  There is such a thing as a "clutter" in the landscape.  Also, the time spent revising the plan, then revising the estimate, then revising the plan, then revising the estimate, then... again, again, again, can be counterproductive as well.  And that targeted budget that you had set aside might no longer be attainable at all,with all of the things being added and subtracted.

3.  There is also the time vaccum in the time-value continuum, where any designer who needs to earn a living and support a family in a seasonal industry can not afford to craft the perfect design for 12-15+ hours for free.  Instead, they might "throw things together" and the design is not at the level it could be, or is way too ambiguous to start.   Anyone who is busy is probably *good* or at least might likely be *better* than the ones who have much more idle time to donate for their services. Anyone who is donating lots of time will likely expect to reap more than the usual amount of money from the project.  Landscapers, or landscape designers don't get rich, nor they should not really plan to get rich on one or two projects instead of  10 or 15.    

4.  With the lack of a more *genuine personal connection* and commitment between you and any one particular designer, there are some personal-level details and design touches which don't get into the design.  When one designer makes a connection and is able to communicate and relate with you, well... that is good!   You could be spending *a lot* of time with them in the future, possibly even seeing them at times years after.  Landscapes are things that grow and evolve, and often even look their best three years later.  It is good to make a connection and a friend out of your designer.  This is why I sometimes get hugs from a few clients when I go out to visit.  We've been through a lot together and they have become my friends.  ....It is an on-going relationship. 

The point of this is to make the suggestion that you host a thorough interview and discuss your project in a systematic process that will identify who is best for you.  Rather than try to host "the Landscaper's Challenge", I would host an interview with the three people you are considering, which focuses on *your needs*, and then their work history, their skills, their references, and how well you and the designer can connect and are able to communicate and relate with each other.  Again, you could be spending *a lot* of time, and maybe *a lot* of money, with them in the future.

But, if you do happen to host Landscaper's Challenge on a major network, like HGTV, to give each designer the chance to do the project and be on national television showcasing their work.  Then, I will gladly do a  "Landscaper's Challenge" without hesitation.  The HGTV "Curb Appeal" show was not so bad, it was actually pretty fun working with the clients and the production crew, but was a bit stressful.  I think I did lose some of my hair in the process and the camera added about 15 lbs.  Here is the link to that episode (hopefully they will post a partial video clip of it in the future):

http://www.hgtv.com/curb-appeal/change-for-a-classic-colonial/index.html


Best of luck!
DS

The Time - Value Continuum

Here is a sample graphic I did for my first "really big project" back in 2000. 

In ten years, a lot has changed.

There are these things that I have been wondering for the past few years about time and value.  If I may, I would like to ask you (any reader of this, now or in the future) for your help with some answers.  I know I don't have any real "followers" on here.  But hopefully through Facebook and the potential HGTV enthusiasts,  or the weekend-warrior homeowners who might be out there, or even the fellow landscape professionals out there who might be able to offer some valuable advice through any of these channels.  I would appreciated any bits of good feedback.  Let's imagine for a moment...

*cue the harp music and dream imagery*

We are in the year 2010.  Let's imagine you are a homeowner with a "diamond in the rough" property, and have set aside a budget of $100,000 to invest into a well-conceived landscape for you, your family, and friends to enjoy over the next ten years.  It might include things such as a pool, pond, or outdoor living space with some features that you have been dreaming about to enjoy in your time outdoors. You have the funds and you have some ideas, but need to have them crafted into the ultimate design that will skillfully include all of the features you desire.  So.... you need a design, and you need a good designer.

Well, of course I always aspire to be that designer for you to call, and hopefully you will call me.  So, let's say that you do, and you happen to call one or two other possible designers.  Here it is, the "Landscaper's Challenge", which always sounds good in theory, but could often become a waste of time and delay the process of getting your work done.   (I thought about rambling on this for a moment, but please refer to the next blog post for an explanation.)   Anyway, sorry for the tangent...

Back to the time-value continuum.  So I have some different design tools to offer you in the process of creating your $100,000 landscape.  Each of these tools takes a certain amount of time to use in perparation of your plans, and each tool is effective in certain ways, some more than others.  But if I could ask for your advice, which tools are most and least effective, and how much might you think is reasonable to spend on each type of design tool, to get the design that you really want...

So, you start with some type of nice plan layout.... and you ask:  "what is this supposed to look like?"



Here are some options:

Case 1.  Hand-drawn graphics/sketches used to supplement a landscape plan.

1. How effective is this to you?

A. Very!
B. It helps, I would pay for this.
C. It is not really necessary, or I would not pay for it. 

2.  How much would this (type of) graphic be worth to you?  

A. $100 - $250
B. $250 - $500
C. $500 - $750
D. $750 - $1,000
E. $1,000-$1,250
F. $1,250 - $1,500
G. Nothing


Case 2:  Larger-Scale hand-drawn graphics/sketches used to supplement a landscape plan.


3. How effective is this to you?

A. Very!
B. It helps, I would pay for this.
C. It is not really necessary, or I would not pay for it.

4. How much would this graphic be worth to you?

A. $100 - $250
B. $250 - $500
C. $500 - $750
D. $750 - $1,000
E.  $1,000-$1,250
F. $1,250 - $1,500
G. Nothing


Case 3:  Computer Photo-Imaging.


5. How effective is this to you?

A. Very!
B. It helps, I would pay for this.
C. It is not really necessary, or I would not pay for it.

6. How much would this graphic be worth to you?

A. $100 - $250
B. $250 - $500
C. $500 - $750
D. $750 - $1,000
E. $1,000-$1,250
F. $1,250 - $1,500
G. Nothing



Case 4:  Computer-Imaging, to the Extreme.



7. How effective is this to you?

A. Very!
B. It helps, I would pay for this.
C. It is not really necessary, or I would not pay for it.

8. How much would this graphic be worth to you?

A. $250 - $500
B. $500 - $750
C. $750 - $1,000
D. $1,000-$1,250
E. $1,250 - $1,500
F. $1,500 - $1,750
G. $1,750 - $2,000
H. $2,000 or more is definitely justifiable.
H. Nothing


Each one of these are tools is effective in showing people their design, while allowing them to particicpate in the design process as they viusalize the finished project.  However, there are significant differences in how much time each of these techniques will typically require. A case can be made that the lastest/greatest and most time-consuming techniques used to illustrate a design are not the best and most cost-effective methods to use.  Their could be a case made for the old hand-drawn illustrations as the best method for design graphics, depending on how much people want to invest in their design and what they need to see, as they don't always take such an enormous amount of time.  

Hmmm, but it is great to be able to say:  "let me show you what this stone paver will look like on your terrace."    

Whatever answers or feedback you can provide are greatly appreciated!

***If you answer all of these and send them to me at:  Dave@landscapedesignstudios.com along with whatever feedback you have, I will offer you $100 off of any design work you need.*** 

  

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Time to Play Ball!

For me, growing up in Iowa with summer baseball, watching movies like The Natural, Field of Dreams, Bull Durham, Major League, and the original Bad News Bears with Walter Matthau... and, periodically heading to various major league ballparks around the midwest when I wasn't actually playing it or watching it at the local level... the start of baseball season was the beginning of spring and the signal that the summer days were imminent.  Today is that day, and the dog days of summer are not far ahead.

While I was not, and am not now, the baseball player I dreamed of becoming, it is nice to live in a cycle that is paralleled by the baseball season.  It seems that the landscape season in Minnesota largely follows the same path and routine as that of a professional ball player.  There are the winter days off, taking some time off but continuing to sharpen the skills and study the game.  The spring training begins with some design work and taking training programs that the MNLA or other associations and vendors put on in January, February, and March.  Then, the season arrives at the first burst of spring-like weather, when it seems the snow is behind us and the more temperate weather is here to stay.  The time spent outdoors in the field starts to increase week by week.  Then, the season takes speed and is a fury of going place to place to place, with lots of travel and lots of time logged into the computer doing CAD drawings and making correspondence.  Hopefully, by the latter part of the season, the rewards are coming in with a good base of business and success that can get you through the month of October and early November.  And, hopefully, by the time that the decline in the cold darkness of winter dormancy arrives, when it is time to retreat indoors, there is a level of satisfaction and reward with how the season had ended.  This happens just as the major league baseball champions are crowned.  Finally, it is time to relax and reflect, and gradually plan out the strategies of the next season.  And, ultimately, the cycle begins all over again.

The big difference, of course, is that I do not get paid anything like a professional ball player.  Not just in terms of money, but also in terms of salary versus performance-based income.  If only players could get paid based on the number of wins they have, or RBIs, or put-outs, or pitching victories they attain.  Or, better yet, if only I could get paid a guranteed salary whether or not I produce it, and can be paid handsomely for endorsements.  Then, we'd really be talking parallel.

One of the programs that I love playing with and can use effectively is Google SketchUp.  It is a pretty versatile software which allows mockups of certain ideas, as well as more thorough studies of spaces and structures, with a level of illustration that is effective for putting clients into their design . It is something that is not for every client or every project, but when used and blended with other conventional design techniques, it can be very useful and helpful.  It can bring out the masochist in you, and can be about as addictive as getting immersed in a video game and trying to get to that next level.  But it allows clients to really see and preview aspects of their design.

Here are some examples of how I use SketchUp, which are additional to the models of a project shown in previous posts.





     
Here are the seats that I will be sitting in at Target Field, the new home of the Minnesota Twins, this summer.  This model was created by "makikalem" on SketchUp.  Just when I think that I am being a masochist, I see models like this, or the Eiffel Tower, and realize that maybe I am not alone in my SketchUp addiction.

First Game Seats:


Second Game Seats:



The Concourse:

The Ballpark from above: