3D architectural rendering cost in Luxembourg (2026)

A €1 800 project quote with TVA at 17 % becomes €2 106 all-in — convert to the TVA-inclusive figure before comparing, because freelance visualisers and agency studios quote net by default.

Format drivers:

• Still image vs. walkthrough: an animation sits at roughly two to three times the cost of the equivalent still, because every frame has to hold up individually and render time scales with length
• Consistency across a package: a four-image interior package is not four times the price of one image — the environment, lighting and materials are built once and reused, so the marginal image is €300–€500 rather than a full single-image fee
• Resolution: print-quality output at 4K or 6K adds 10–20 % over a standard 2K web-delivery file
• Day / night pair: swapping the lighting rig for a twilight version of the same camera adds €200–€400 rather than a full second image

The sixfold spread between the bottom and the top of the range is not a margin game — it reflects a real difference in hours on the file. A well-scoped quote pulls the project toward the correct point on the curve.

The six drivers that matter:

• Level of detail. White-model blocking (untextured geometry, neutral light) renders in a day and costs €250–€450 per image. Photoreal output — physically-based materials, global illumination, real-world bokeh, textile displacement maps, imperfect ceramics — takes three to five days and justifies the €1 200–€1 800 end of the single-image range.
• Number of camera angles. Each additional final camera adds €300–€500 on a package, because the environment is reused but the shot itself must be composed, lit and tuned independently.
• Source material. Working from a clean architect's DWG or IFC model is the best case. Reconstructing from a PDF floor plan adds €200–€400 of measurement work. Starting from paper plans plus a site visit adds €500–€800.
• Material and finish research. A design-forward kitchen with specific brand finishes — stone slab with a named vein, a Luxembourg-supplied oak veneer, a specific tapware family — needs real texture capture and adds €150–€300 per shot.
• Revision cycles. Most quotes include two revision rounds. A third round is usually billed at €80–€120/hr, capped at €500–€800 per additional camera.
• Delivery format. Web-only JPEG is included. Print-ready TIFF at 300 dpi for A2, a branded PDF layout or a stripped alpha channel for designer retouching is a €100–€250 line.

A written scope document is the single best predictor of a smooth project. Read it line by line — what is counted and what is explicitly excluded matters as much as the headline price.

Included in a typical interior-package quote (€1 500–€2 500):

• 3 to 4 final rendered cameras at 2K web resolution
• One consolidated material board drawn from client-supplied references
• Two revision rounds covering material swaps, camera tweaks and lighting adjustments
• Final delivery as JPEG plus layered PSD on request
• A written handoff listing source-file versions and render engine used

Usually not included — expect a separate line:

• Site measurement or laser-scan survey — budget €350–€700 on a flat, €700–€1 200 on a house
• Furniture modelling from scratch when the specified piece is not in a commercial asset library — €80–€200 per custom piece
• Landscaping beyond a generic lawn — mature trees, specific planting schemes, hardscape patterns at €250–€500
• Drone-style exterior aerials requiring terrain and neighbouring-building modelling — €500–€1 000 per view
• Print production — separate from the render fee, delegated to a printer
• Usage rights beyond the client's own marketing — resale or developer-brochure rights often carry a +25–50 % licensing uplift

Red flags in a quote:

• No mention of revision cycles — it will come back as an hourly bill
• "Photoreal quality" without sample images from the same studio at a similar brief
• A flat fee that does not name the camera count — scope will drift

Why the freelance-to-studio step is not linear:

• A freelancer bills their own hours — a studio bills art direction, model building, material work, render supervision and QA as separate specialisms
• A studio carries a material library built over years — the unit cost of a realistic wall, chair or textile is close to zero for them and meaningful for a freelancer
• A studio accepts liability on commercial use (developer brochure, real-estate portal) — most freelance contracts cap liability at the fee paid
• Turnaround on a studio is often faster despite the higher price, because the team can parallelise model, materials and lighting

When to pick which:

• A homeowner visualising a single kitchen renovation before choosing a countertop: freelancer
• A small developer marketing a four-unit conversion before completion: studio
• An architect outsourcing the renderings for their own client presentation: studio, on a recurring relationship basis — unit prices drop by 10–20 % on the third project with the same studio

3D rendering in Luxembourg is a professional service and carries TVA at the standard 17 % when billed on its own. When the rendering is commissioned as part of a qualifying renovation of a principal residence and billed on the same invoice by the firm executing the works, it can fall under the 3 % taux super-réduit via the logement.lu mechanism — a meaningful saving on a €3 000 project.

The rule in practice:

• Standalone rendering contract (homeowner commissions a visualiser directly, no linked construction contract): TVA 17 %
• Rendering inside a renovation contract signed with the firm doing the works, on a principal residence, billed on the same invoice: potentially TVA 3 % under the super-reduced regime
• Pre-sales rendering for a developer or for a rental property: TVA 17 % — the super-reduced rate does not apply outside the principal-residence case

What a compliant invoice must show:

• Net amount per line item
• TVA line explicit with rate (17 % or 3 %)
• Provider's TVA number and Autorisation d'établissement reference when applicable
• A written scope description — "rendu photoréaliste cuisine" is enough; "3D services" is not

Rate comparison on a typical €1 800 net project:

The €252 gap is the reason to ask the question at briefing stage — not at invoicing — and to coordinate with the firm running the renovation if it applies.

Revision policy is the single most common source of friction on rendering projects. Read the clause carefully before signing.

Standard revision policy on a declared contract:

• Round 1 — at white-model stage: camera angle, framing, proportions. Free, included.
• Round 2 — at final-lighting stage: materials, colours, furniture swaps. Free, included.
• Round 3 onwards — billed at €80–€120/hr, usually capped per camera at €500–€800 so a single picky reviewer cannot blow up the budget

What triggers an out-of-scope revision (billable, even within the two included rounds):

• Adding a camera after the white-model approval
• Changing the floor plan or opening dimensions after sign-off on the geometry
• Switching the design direction (modern to traditional, light to dark palette) after round 1
• Requesting print resolution after the low-resolution render is already finished

Ownership and source files:

• The final delivered images are licensed to the client for the agreed use
• Source files (.max, .blend, .c4d, texture libraries) are almost always retained by the studio — explicit purchase is possible at €500–€1 500 per camera, and is worth considering only if you plan to hire a different studio for follow-up renderings of the same space
• Render engine outputs (Corona, V-Ray, Cycles) are not portable across studios — a second studio will rebuild from your reference images anyway, so buying source files rarely pays off

Practical tips:

• Lock the floor plan and the design direction before round 1 — the white model is for camera and proportions, not for rethinking the project
• Consolidate all round-2 feedback in a single document — piecemeal feedback over a week burns the included revision budget on communication overhead

Why kitchens and bathrooms sit at the top of their range:

• High density of reflective and refractive materials — stone, ceramic, glass, polished metal — each needs physically correct shaders
• Small room size means the camera is close to every surface, so micro-detail matters far more than on a large living room
• Lighting behaviour in a confined space requires multiple light sources tuned together — one window, one pendant, one strip, one bounce card

Why a package drops the per-image rate:

• The environment is built once — walls, floor, ceiling, trim, windows — and reused across cameras
• Material library is built once and reused
• A second camera in the same space is typically a €400–€600 add, not a fresh €900

House-extension specifics:

• Exterior views need a simplified context of the neighbouring buildings and the garden — the studio will ask for a site visit or drone imagery
• Exterior materials (render colour, window frame finish, stone cladding) respond differently to light than interior materials — budget one extra lighting round beyond interior cameras

Rendering quotes are notoriously hard to compare because the output description is almost always vague. A tight brief handed to three providers turns "€900 versus €1 400 versus €2 200" into a real comparison.

The six checks that matter:

• Camera count. Three providers can quote the same job at wildly different prices because one quotes two cameras and another quotes four. Require the number explicitly, in writing.
• Resolution and delivery format. 2K JPEG for web, 4K TIFF for print, 6K for a banner — each step changes render time by roughly 2×. Fix the format at briefing.
• Revision policy. Two rounds included, hourly rate for round three, per-camera cap — all three numbers stated explicitly. "Revisions included within reason" is not a number.
• Reference images from the studio's own portfolio. Ask for two or three previous renderings on a similar brief. Brand-pulled hero shots on a sales page are marketing; the link to a ten-image project case study is evidence.
• TVA and total. All three providers on net or all three on brutto — mix at your peril. Where the super-reduced 3 % rate might apply, confirm each provider's setup.
• Source of the geometry. One provider may silently assume a clean DWG; another may include laser-scan measurement. The €600 gap is real only if scope is real.

A clean briefing pack to send all three providers:

• Floor plan as PDF with dimensions
• 8 to 12 reference images sorted by room
• Material list with brand references where possible
• Desired camera count and angles in plan form
• Delivery format and required resolution
• Deadline and usage rights scope

Providers quoting from the same pack land within ±20 % of each other on the price line. Wider spreads almost always trace back to one provider reading the brief differently — worth a conversation before assuming the cheapest is the winner.