so you're an architect, not a web designer.
you don't know what to charge.

are you qualified to design a website and charge for it? considering the above i would recommend you bid really low and use it as a learning experience.

and people get mad at IT people calling themselves Information Architects...heh...now we have architects masquerading as web designers? From the websites I have seen that firms have done in house...you need to go low. I was billed out at $175 an hour as a web designer back in 1997...but it was not something I "did on the side"...how many sites have you done? What is the technology being used? Is there interactive coding needed (javascript, etc) can you do it? Is there a database being tied into the site? And if so, again - can you do it?

There is a lot to consider before coming up with an hourly fee. First you need a solid project scope...or you will get scope creep and waste your and your clients time and money.

swamp, as you are reading this you are billing. Right?

just do some wireframes and a flowchart of the finished site, then bill them 5% of the total cost of operating the business.

whatever you do don't make it look like this
monstrosity!

Yes I have done websites before when I was in undergrad. First one outside of school. It is a side project since architects make absolute shit for money. Using Flash and others. Don't want to get screwed for money like every architect does.

he didn't say he was a web designer, jc, just that he was designing a website.

lighten up steven...I was making a joke based on all the IT snipes on this forum.

and to make my point that is why I typed "heh" after my comment...you chose to leave that part out.

Swamp. I would say calculate a full project scope and then calculate your expected hours and charge a flat fee. Let your client know what that flat fee covers and have them pa 1/3 up front at least. Have reviews and let them know where the project is within the original scope each time. Then, if they chose to go over the agreed scope, you can add hours...that would be my advice.

Also, I would argue againt a flash heavy site with tons of transitions etc...I know architects in general love the 90's flash sites...but viewers of sites do not like to wait just for a sliding menu...content is king...clear and easy access to information is key...not animations, transitions, and loading bars.

lastly, without seeing your work and what you are capable of...it is difficult to give a true idea of your value as a web designer.

... while keeping in mind that an experienced web designer could probably do the project much much quicker. so if you charge by the hour, your $20/hr will probably equal the same final price as a good designer charging $125/hr.

I'd suggest avoid using Flash unless you have a solid working knowledge of actionscript.

Do a simple html site, keep it clean and clear.


I'd recommend getting approval at significant steps, such as design layout, site map, content. etc. This will eliminate the headaches.

Also, I'd highly recommend getting all the content before you start (although this is rarely possible to get everything).

I would say calculate a full project scope and then calculate your expected hours and charge a flat fee. Let your client know what that flat fee covers and have them pa 1/3 up front at least. Have reviews and let them know where the project is within the original scope each time. Then, if they chose to go over the agreed scope, you can add hours...that would be my advice. 

A friend of mine is a web designer. He charges $15/hour. He is currently working on a project. He fully designed and developing a site. I called him and got the web site's name. You may check his work.

https://homeztale.com/