[CenIL_LA]

The only issues that lie with an architect standing up for thier work to the levels of high quality is that, in the end, the architect rarely calls all those shots. Its the architect that is sometimes making the rendering but they are also on the payroll of a developer not vice-versa. Renderings may even be done by a subcontracted source. Renderings taken may not always be the most up to date because budgets are not always set up to show all changes that occur or how the tiny details are being carried out necessarily. As a business expense (architect) of a developer do you want to spend more money than you are getting paid? Developers are the ones ruining good portions of the designs, not the designers.

The only thing an architect can really do is stick up for their designs the best they can. Generally the only thing they can honestly ask for is that legally thier designs are meeting the safety and welfare of the occupants or walk away forfitting costs assumed. A developer will listen to a designer but in the end they are most concerned with thier wallet. They are also concerned that they wont get sued while somewhat meeting the architects vision to thier own standards. If a developer wants to skimp on materials/better details they will certainly do it, and they do. I would agree I would love to see this POMO done with the greatest care but we would need a different class of developer in Chicago to do that. An architect selling thier soul, does it because they need the job/market to keep thier companies or employees afloat. If someone is always willing to completely bend over to get a job, you better be at least willing to put up with a few things you dont like. Few architects honestly want to design crap.