Hi, I'm an architecture student in the process of looking for jobs and putting together a portfolio. Is it appropriate to use a website like WordPress to create an online portfolio, or do employers prefer to see a printed/ PDF portfolio? Thanks!
agree with tduds, i review lots of applications each week and only click on any link if the application is REALLY interesting. Or on a further review. But never on any application I though "where's the website?"
focus on the PDF portfolio. this will take a lot of time already. only go for the website if you have time to spare.... cos it will take even more time and is not that important.
Most require an attached PDF of sub 5mb. That means that the portfolio should focus solely on your best work in less than 25 pages and compressed so that the quality isn't bad. My website is listed on my resume but it's more of an added bonus and (through google analytics) most don't actually look at it.
i'd supply a link to your linkedin profile in your cover letter. You can put pdfs of your resume and portfolio there and be able to track who's looking at it.
I have to ask though, why in the world are we still doing arch portfolio in PDF form? Every other industry is doing websites. I don't see the benefit other than printing and so old school recruiters at firms can download and save them. Can someone explain this? The idea that recruiters can't save links is absurd. I've worked in the advertising industry for several years now. We do project based work just like arch projects. The only form of portfolio excepted is website. If you sent in a PDF you would be laughed at. Explain why it is different? Shouldn't we embrace the internet and stop living in 2005?
Nov 29, 23 11:44 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
The bigger question is why you wasted your time responding to a thread over 8 years old?
PDF is a lot higher resolution. Websites will lose detail for any pixel based content. I see the benefit of both and having both so you should have valid portfolio content in both. Of course, schools will have their requirements for submission but professionally, you should have both. Additionally, a PDF is digital so it can be viewed in a browser and with code, you have the content viewed within a website format. Plain web is converting to images and that is where image format content can lose quality but you have to look at your original content. If is has a lot of very fine details, making them in to images for web, you likely have to drop resolution and use image formats like jpeg (lossy compression) to reduce file size and speed up process within a web. When it comes to jobs, you should ideally have a good portfolio in formats suitable for web and suitable for print. As for the laughing, that's the typical stupid laughing at others. There are pros and cons to each and they don't know it or seem to know it. They just think they are so cool using the web and laughing at people using PDFs. Sure, you can make a website with images and all but ultimately, the fucking point is conveying the design and they think they are cool for laughing when they laugh while ignorant because they think they are cool but really just some beavises and buttheads. There is nothing cool or elite about either. these are just a couple ways of presenting.
Nov 30, 23 12:13 am ·
·
Ben Jackson
Thanks for your comment. It makes sense. When I referred to people laughing at a pdf portfolio I only referred to advertising. Most industries including graphic design, advertising, industrial design, and many more use only websites. I’m only saying that if you had a PDF portfolio, no one would look at it. As the industry standard in architecture is PDF, the industry standard in every other industry websites. I wouldn’t laugh at an architect with a PDF portfolio because it is the standard. But obviously, we must question why it is still the standard. I get that quality loss is possible, but there are certain website platforms where you can pay to have high-quality image downloads. A website is inherently just more interactive. You can jump around to different projects and it’s accessible to everyone. I do like the idea of having a book type portfolio. I think I will do both as it is the standard still thanks again.
Web or pdf portfolio?
Hi, I'm an architecture student in the process of looking for jobs and putting together a portfolio. Is it appropriate to use a website like WordPress to create an online portfolio, or do employers prefer to see a printed/ PDF portfolio? Thanks!
PDF. If you want to set up a web portfolio, include it as a link in your application, but definitely send the PDF as well.
agree with tduds, i review lots of applications each week and only click on any link if the application is REALLY interesting. Or on a further review. But never on any application I though "where's the website?"
focus on the PDF portfolio. this will take a lot of time already. only go for the website if you have time to spare.... cos it will take even more time and is not that important.
Most require an attached PDF of sub 5mb. That means that the portfolio should focus solely on your best work in less than 25 pages and compressed so that the quality isn't bad. My website is listed on my resume but it's more of an added bonus and (through google analytics) most don't actually look at it.
i'd supply a link to your linkedin profile in your cover letter. You can put pdfs of your resume and portfolio there and be able to track who's looking at it.
This article might be helpful for you. Good luck!
The Two Page Architecture Portfolio
I have to ask though, why in the world are we still doing arch portfolio in PDF form? Every other industry is doing websites. I don't see the benefit other than printing and so old school recruiters at firms can download and save them. Can someone explain this? The idea that recruiters can't save links is absurd. I've worked in the advertising industry for several years now. We do project based work just like arch projects. The only form of portfolio excepted is website. If you sent in a PDF you would be laughed at. Explain why it is different? Shouldn't we embrace the internet and stop living in 2005?
The bigger question is why you wasted your time responding to a thread over 8 years old?
It’s still a valid question.
PDF is a lot higher resolution. Websites will lose detail for any pixel based content. I see the benefit of both and having both so you should have valid portfolio content in both. Of course, schools will have their requirements for submission but professionally, you should have both. Additionally, a PDF is digital so it can be viewed in a browser and with code, you have the content viewed within a website format. Plain web is converting to images and that is where image format content can lose quality but you have to look at your original content. If is has a lot of very fine details, making them in to images for web, you likely have to drop resolution and use image formats like jpeg (lossy compression) to reduce file size and speed up process within a web. When it comes to jobs, you should ideally have a good portfolio in formats suitable for web and suitable for print. As for the laughing, that's the typical stupid laughing at others. There are pros and cons to each and they don't know it or seem to know it. They just think they are so cool using the web and laughing at people using PDFs. Sure, you can make a website with images and all but ultimately, the fucking point is conveying the design and they think they are cool for laughing when they laugh while ignorant because they think they are cool but really just some beavises and buttheads. There is nothing cool or elite about either. these are just a couple ways of presenting.
Thanks for your comment. It makes sense. When I referred to people laughing at a pdf portfolio I only referred to advertising. Most industries including graphic design, advertising, industrial design, and many more use only websites. I’m only saying that if you had a PDF portfolio, no one would look at it. As the industry standard in architecture is PDF, the industry standard in every other industry websites. I wouldn’t laugh at an architect with a PDF portfolio because it is the standard. But obviously, we must question why it is still the standard. I get that quality loss is possible, but there are certain website platforms where you can pay to have high-quality image downloads. A website is inherently just more interactive. You can jump around to different projects and it’s accessible to everyone. I do like the idea of having a book type portfolio. I think I will do both as it is the standard still thanks again.
wow this thread is from 2015, but me making a web portfolio this fall thinking I'm cutting edge smh
My first web portfolio was in 2003.
PDF 100%. I'm part of the recruiting committee at my firm and we do not like when candidates just paste a link to a dropbox or issuu.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.