Let's put your ROI case into action
We'll be in touch with specific next steps. Please use the business contact information.
For brands in the furniture, home & living segment, the production route and workflow determine budget, time-to-market and consistency of look.
Our CGI cost calculator shows transparently when CGI is more cost-effective than traditional photography - without making any significant compromises in image quality. It is based on cost indices that reflect typical expenses: Set/location, travel, styling/props, lighting/angles, post-production, modeling, rendering and revisions. Result: Savings in % and the break-even point for variants.
We recommend our overview of 3D visualization & CGI and real examples in the projects. You can find a compact definition of ROI on Wikipedia.
Enter realistic project parameters and see immediately how variations, angles, scenes, and revision cycles affect the ROI—including the break-even point.
We weight all typical expenses: set/location & team (photo) versus modeling, scene setup, render and post (CGI). This creates a transparent cost index without quoting prices, ideal for budget/TCO(total cost of ownership) planning.
With each additional color, front, surface, or perspective, CGI becomes relatively more cost-effective. The calculator displays the break-even point at which CGI variants ultimately offer an advantage (break-even analysis).
A 3D asset can be used across multiple campaigns: new looks, close-ups, different rooms. Quickly review your models in the free 3D viewer and build a content hub instead of producing a new set for each campaign.
Color, material and finish fidelity (CMF) and consistent brand lighting are essential. For e-commerce, silo renders and packshot renderings complement the milieus seamlessly - see silo/free-plate renders.
No weather- or season-related risks, no location bottlenecks. Angles and variations are reproducible, making this ideal for seasonal drops or quick line expansions.
The same assets power Motion (product and feature clips) and interactive experiences. Start small with stills and expand later—for example, with the 3D Animation Studio.
The comparison is based on two cost indices (photo vs. CGI) that weigh typical expenses for set/location, travel, styling, camera angles, variations, post-production, modeling, rendering, and revisions. The percentage savings is calculated based on the difference between the two.
The break-even point is the number of variants at which CGI becomes equal to or less than Foto (with all other parameters held constant). If the value is 0, the variable additional costs per variant in CGI are equal to or less than those in Foto—meaning that CGI is already profitable starting with the first variant.
No. The calculator provides a rough estimate. To provide a quote, we’ll review your setup (design, complexity, assets, deadlines) and calculate the cost based on your briefing.
He compares cost indices for photography versus CGI (set/location, travel, styling, camera angles, variations, post-production versus modeling, setup, rendering, post-production). The difference represents the savings in percent.
1) Variants per product, 2) Angles per scene, 3) Number of scenes, 4) Revision cycles. These four factors have the greatest impact on the break-even point and ROI.
If the variable costs per variant in CGI are equal to or lower than those in photo production, CGI is cost-effective starting with the first variant.
They significantly reduce the amount of modeling required. Simply enable the CAD option in the calculator—the index will take this into account.
Brand-name quality with CMF consistency and a consistent lighting setup. The tool compares processes—not “quality versus price.”