Do 3D Tour Clients Now Want Floor Plans, CAD Files, Point Clouds & Panos?21620
Pages:
1
 Owner,Managing Editor and Publisher of WGAN Forum and WGAN-TV Podcast Fairfield, California |
TomSparks private msg quote post Address this user | |
 Short answer: Yes, across more verticals than a year ago, clients increasingly ask 3D tour providers for the underlying data deliverables (2D floor plans, CAD/DWG files, E57 point clouds, and downloadable 360° panoramas), not just a hosted tour link. The tour URL is becoming the baseline, and the data exports are becoming the paid upsell. That's what I'm seeing on the ground. Curious whether it matches your experience. What are clients actually asking for beyond the tour link? The four requests I hear most often: Floor plans — schematic and dimensioned 2D plans. Still the most common "can you also send..." ask, especially from agents and property managers. CAD files — DWG/DXF for architects, renovators, and AEC clients who want to work directly off the scan instead of re-measuring. Point clouds — E57/LAS/LAZ for engineering and AEC workflows. These clients don't care about the polished tour; they want raw scan data to drop into their own software. Downloadable panoramas — full-res 360° stills for marketing teams that want social assets, or to host imagery on their own platforms. Why is this shift happening now? Capture hardware and processing pipelines have matured to the point where one scanning session can output multiple deliverables. Clients have caught on that the data already exists — so they're asking for it. The differentiator is no longer "do you offer a 3D tour," it's "what can you hand me besides the link." Should you bundle these or charge separately? This is the real debate, and where I'd love the group's input: Are you seeing this demand shift too, or is it isolated to specific verticals (AEC, insurance, facilities)? Add-on pricing vs. bundled into the base package — what's working for you? Which deliverables are worth offering, and which are more trouble than the margin justifies? Does your current hardware/workflow output usable versions natively, or are you reprocessing every time? My take The tour link is table stakes. The margin is increasingly in the data deliverables — but only if your pricing reflects the extra processing time, and you're not giving away point clouds for free because a client asked nicely. Price the data like data. What's your experience — are clients leading this, or are you proactively offering exports to differentiate? |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 US Building Survey, LLC Olathe, Kansas |
rhelling private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I think there might also be a different question to ask. “Are clients that want floor plans able to utilize 3D scans?” I agree that the margin is in the various deliverables. The scanning is just the field work…but it should be done consistent with what is needed. I think you can scan a place differently for a walk-through then for a construction as built. There is a large need for floor plans and as built information in the AEC arena. I think it’s been relatively recent that the data from scanning has been reliable enough to use in that field. It’s not perfect and there is still plenty of information that needs to be gathered beyond just scanning…but it’s improving and being used for that more. In my experience, the 3d scan doesn’t mean much for the client. It’s cool…but they want the floor plan, the square footage, the utilities, materials, etc. They want their design team to price out stuff and space plan. The scan is just a method to gather that request. So…the pricing comes from what the various requests are: tour, plans, elevations, etc. |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Owner, Managing Editor and Publisher of WGAN Forum and WGAN-TV Podcast Fairfield, California |
TomSparks private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @rhelling. I agree you do scan a space different for marketing vs aec. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1