Dear archinect users, I am a recent graduate of a liberal arts college in Ohio. I double majored in physics and studio art. I will be applying to M. Arch programs in US for the 2016 fall enrollment. I just would like to know which program I would fit the best.
Here are some details of my education and experience. During my senior year, I did a year-long research in nuclear physics on stopping power and composed a series of landscape photography that was sold for ~$1000. Since I was not studying architecture, I sought experience in the professional world. During my sophomore year, I joined a team of builders to construct two log cabins and a timber residence in South Korea (home country). I also interned for an architectural designer in Palo Alto, California for a month after I graduated. I mostly did CAD work and assisted client meetings. Currently, I am apprenticing a traditional Korean pottery master to learn to throw celadons. I plan on including my final products for the final portfolio.
So, my portfolio will include
Research in nuclear physics + general relativity
Landscape photography + digital imaging
Pictures from the construction experience
CAD work samples
Ceramic works
They are available to see on my personal website at www.kim-minsung.com. The ceramic works are NOT the work that I am doing right now. They will be much improved.
I am looking at the schools that everyone are looking at. Berkeley, Cornell, Harvard, Yale, MIT… basically the ivies. I do have lower grade, 2.99 and not expecting to recieve an outstanding GRE score, 150-160. I know the choices are very ambitious of me, but I believe they are well worth the investment. I am a little anxious but not discouraged. Rather, I am excited to hear good news from the schools. Maybe I am too optimistic but I believe the decision making professors will recognize me as a valuable student. I did some research to decide which program would fit me the best, but I am not able to judge with confidence at this point. Please share your knowledge or experience to help me make the decision.
chigurh
Jul 25, 15 11:04 am
stick with nuclear physics.
Min Sung Kim
Jul 26, 15 3:25 am
Chigurh, why are you saying that?? Although I will most likely go for M.Arch still, please elaborate on your reasoning...
chigurh
Jul 26, 15 10:15 am
you will make more money in physics, architecture is a very difficult profession to get ahead in, it seems like you have other creative outlets that are of interest that will sustain that part of your life while you are working in a stable long term career (physics).
Min Sung Kim
Jul 27, 15 6:47 pm
Well, I have been well aware of that. However, I have given up wanting to be rich for some considerable time. Now, could you help me answer the original question? Which architectural school do you think would fit the best?
thompson's gazelle
Jul 28, 15 5:09 am
I have a feeling that your research work would hurt your portfolio unless you turn it into a design project--i.e. some pretty infographic poster or something.. Also your quasi-architectural works need more formatting. Your ceramic work and landscape photography are beautiful I gotta say. If you're in Korea there are a bunch of prep-institutes for M.arch programs and design schools in general. It's not a path I took personally, but have seen many many many Korean fellow students and friends go into top programs, and surprisingly a number of them did well in their graduate studies. If you're lost, try talking to such hakwon's . Used to despise them, but now that I look back, it seems like a pretty good idea to get their help.
Min Sung Kim
Jul 28, 15 7:46 pm
@thompsons gazelle
Thank you for your comment. I love the idea of info graph. I can think of many possibilities already. I believe info graph will be a very effective. Thank you.
Yes, my architectural work need more formatting. I must say, hakwons won't be an option for me since I am occupied learning from a ceramic master in Korea. Could you just point out the biggest problems that you see? I will have to fix it as much as I can using online instructions on YouTube or cad forums.
Lastly, based on what you have seen, could you suggest some programs that would fit me the best? That would be much appreciated.
Thanks
thompson's gazelle
Jul 28, 15 8:35 pm
The schools you're looking into all value ideas over technicality. Your work currently lacks visual explanations about how you ended up with the final product. Adding hand sketches, diagrams (or digital if you're adobe-savvy), process models might be a first step. This is for your research projects and ceramics as well if possible. You also need more design/artistic work.
I still think a hakwon might be a better option for you than to work on more ceramics before applying. If you need more art projects, I assume the hakwon will throw some at you to work on. They provide a studio setting with other applicants, so you could get a lot of feedback compared to working by yourself. Lastly I gotta say, although very similar in style, the portfolios of students who went to hakwon tend to be very sophisticated in layout both in print or digital.
This might be debatable, but I might just say it. Out of the schools you mentioned, whatever school you go to, the quality of education isn't going to be that different. All schools value design and creative thinking, demand hard work, conservative and progressive in different parts. So in terms of best-fit schools for you, it seems like it will depend on which name you want to put on your resume unless you're specifically interested in a particular design topic, professor, pedagogy, or other factors such as networking or which city you want to live for 3+ years.
Korearch
Jul 29, 15 1:10 pm
What about the foundation course of AA school in London? Its very good and renowned course for people who are looking for their first step of architecture, and would be an option for your dream schools. Architecture schools in Europe are very good.
Your strong point I found from your website is artwork; Photos and porcelains are very impressive. And I "do not" want to say like this way.... some of physical graphs you worked still have possibilities to be changed and understood into parametricism - a style within contemporary avant-garde architecture using computer design, according to online dictionary. AA school will be satisfied with amazing artworks from your graphs to porcelains.
Yet, It is still tough for you to enter that of school you mentioned, as well AA, unless you will substantiate more design works and visualisation of your pre-major works.So do some works on your projects to embellish yourself.
So, my recommendation is that you ask yourselves first like, Am I like to study very formal but essential principle of architecture and design, or Am I more like to study something radical and contemporary design tendency, because this process will be a measure for you to anticipate which style of education fit you. As I think, Europe is more based on essential meaning of architecture, and US is more focused on Zeitgeist.
You are interested in specific theory based education in architecture? Consider of Harvard and Columbia. They are very well known for its theory based curriculum, and not just designing something without huge results of your original thinking. You are interested in technology in architecture? Think about MIT, Sci-arc, Pratt, UPenn, and so on.
Min Sung Kim
Jul 31, 15 3:25 am
Thank you both for the response, they are both very helpful.
Your comments on my physics work are quite different from what I expected. I thought the research work is very solid, and that I just need to present the concepts within few pages of my portfolio. I have created some schematics using illustrator in order to deliver the information better (somewhat like info graphics as gazelle mentioned before. I think this might be the "visual explanation" that you mentioned in the second comment. I have attached a pdf file which will be a page of the portfolio. I would love to hear what you think.
I would like a well rounded program so that I will be introduced to many aspects of architecture. If what Thompson said about the quality of education is generally true, then I guess it does not really matter within U.S. However, I can certainly imagine that there are larger difference between American programs and European programs. Could you tell me the major differences between European and American? Also, if you could suggest some attractive european programs, that would be fantastic. I have been looking at German programs, since their free tuition policy is so attractive.
Aye aye, I feel that my time is running out, making me somewhat nervous. I hope all goes well haha. to be on the safe side, I will pay a visit to a few hakwons to check out what they could do for me.
and btw, a 13mbs pdf? That has to break some sort of general relativity law for it to be so big.
Min Sung Kim
Aug 2, 15 11:03 am
I'm sorry its so big. I thought I uploaded the reduced version. Anyway, why are you saying that it is not a portfolio page? I believe it can be in any format... please elaborate on your comment.
redwing
Aug 3, 15 3:32 am
I don't say this to be rude, but to try to give constructive advice for putting together a grad school application portfolio...
That page would likely keep you out of most, if not all, competitive programs in the US. It definitely won't help you. The graphics are similar to what would be in a physics textbook, and they don't appear to represent original research but rather show that you understand some concepts. That understanding is already conveyed by the fact you have a degree in the subject, and it can be leveraged to your advantage in your application essay. However, it does not say anything about your design abilities or visual acuity in general. The same can be said of the graphs you show on your web site. An infographic (for instance, see the work of Edward Tufte) is a designed thing with an aesthetic agenda; graphs of data points are not. Infographics are a sort of genre of their own, and I don't think it's necessarily good advice to suggest that someone with no experience of making them start making them now to put in a portfolio.
Fortunately, you seem to have plenty of work that does speak to your visual skills! I would focus more on your studio art work, landscape photos (the stitching together is nice, and I would definitely keep that aspect), and ceramics. Ceramics photos could have more room around the object, or crop the background out entirely. As it is, the area around the objects in the photos is too close and awkward. It would be nice to supplement the photos with some sketches of, for instance, different vessel types (to imply a process), since you seem to have the drawing skills.
The construction photos don't say much about your own design work, but the photos themselves are nice and convey an interest, so a page or two of those would probably work for you.
Basically, the portfolio can have very broad content, but it should all have some sort of creative visual value (not just the purpose to prove knowledge) and speak to your potential as a designer. The red and blue images on your web site under general relativity might be repurposed for a design portfolio; only, don't approach them as proof of scientific knowledge, but rather as an instance where your work in science actually suggested separate formal possibilities. Put another way, no admissions committee is going to be interested in understanding your physics research; they want to see things that look good and show that you can mine your various areas of interest to make things that look good (as well as being intelligent).
As earlier posters said, the CAD work that just shows that you have learned the software doesn't help you. You can put your software knowledge on your CV, but the sorts of schools you are talking about will not care too much that you come in knowing certain softwares (especially AutoCAD and Sketchup, which will not be used at those schools - they mostly use Rhino, with some Maya/ Maxwell/ VRay and others). They will teach you software; they want to know that you will be able to design something interesting once they have taught you the software.
Look through Issuu at application portfolios if you haven't already, to get a sense of the sort of CAD work that is included, and the way studio art work is presented.
Good luck!
placebeyondthesplines
Aug 3, 15 8:54 pm
"I don't say this to be rude, but to try to give constructive advice for putting together a grad school application portfolio... "
Maybe you're a kinder person than I am, but there's no need for niceties when it comes to this stuff. This is absolute garbage, and the OP needs to be told it is fucking terrible.
How is it possible to make a Squarespace site look that bad? My god. This person will never be a designer of anything.
Min Sung Kim
Aug 4, 15 11:41 am
@redwings
Thank you for your post, I do not find your criticism rude or unsupported. Rather, it was very reasonable and convincing.
After reading your post, I have done some works that have "creative visual values." Here is a link to a two page pdf (2 MB) that I worked on past few hours. It is not formatted for the portfolio, but should be sufficient for the general viewing.
Yes, I agree that the ceramic photos on the website need a lot of working. However, I plan on excluding those. I will be trying to put together images of new ceramic works since they are much more elegant and gracefully done. I will add some line drawings that illustrate the "plan" of a pottery. Also, using symbols that I use in physics, I will add drawings on top of photos to explain the hand motion of throwing.
I sincerely appreciate your input. I will be posting updated works as I go.
Thanks again.
redwing
Aug 4, 15 3:19 pm
@placebeyondthesplines
As a lurker on this board for a while, I haven't had the impression that you are known for your kindness... but you are usually right, all the same. Still, I have known several students who have transitioned successfully from science or other unrelated fields to design and have been very clueless at first about things many people take for granted (fonts, layouts, colors, whatnot), and I believe design can be taught (to a point) and is not something that requires some kind of inborn baseline. If someone insists on promoting bad images/ layouts as good work though... then no more niceties.
@Min Sung Kim
These are definitely a step in the right direction. It's more about looking interesting and implying that your physics knowledge will translate in some way to design work than about proving any kind of rigor where that translation is involved. Ideally you would have a great narrative to go with it, but that might come later, when you know better how to talk about design.
placebeyondthesplines
Aug 4, 15 5:33 pm
@redwing
I completely agree. There are students that come from non-design backgrounds that absolutely excel, and some people just need exposure to some design fundamentals to unlock their potential.
This kind of work, however, is so antiseptic and uninterested in human experience that I'd almost argue it presents itself in opposition to thoughtful design, much like the treatment of the Squarespace template, which the OP has actively and purposefully ruined with his completely uninformed "aesthetic." This is the kind of science student that gets frustrated with abstract studio exercises about proportion, composition, scale, form, space, and meaning because those concepts aren't "rationalized" enough for them. The kind who might make great engineers but won't ever be skilled designers.
Min Sung Kim
Aug 5, 15 10:10 am
Thank you both. I realize that I didn't understand the purpose of creating portfolio. I simply thought that showing my past studies. I guess I have been too proud of what I had done. I was lost. I believe that our conversation here have pointed me to creating a portfolio that allows the viewers to see my potential as a designer.
Admittedly, I don't know how, not just yet. Maybe its the problem that I will need to answer before I get anywhere. I was talking to my friend today, and brainstorming with him was very helpful. We were discussing ways to incorporate ceramics into architecture. It is just an idea we had our first meeting. Hopefully, we will improve on it or find something else.
Your criticism was tough at first, but I now see that it was necessary. Almost all of my college friends just praised me for what I had done for the two majors. It was sweet, but misled me to "absolute garbage" haha.
Anyway, I will be working hard to produce a portfolio that would not only get me into a nice grad school, but also develop me as a better designer in the process. It may take years to complete, but I am convinced that I will be an architect sooner or later.
Its good to see your improve. I know you have been through some of very harsh comments above at the same time you have learned and felt a lot from those of replies. I bet Its just the tip of an iceberg, seeing few harsh words here, compared to studying in Architecture school. The teachers in Architecture school are relatively different. Some of them are very acrid, and the rests seems to be generous sometimes. Both of them, however, have something in common, which is an insight of design in architecture. So they will stop you or give you a feedback at a specific point of your design process; I'm not sure which attitude they are taking to you and your works.
Anyhow, I like your way to say your think to others, not photo itself as the result. May it also be your strong point in the portfolio. I saw your recent work above, and I recommend you to develop how present your think deliberately, not showing your final results off suddenly on pages.
Dear archinect users, I am a recent graduate of a liberal arts college in Ohio. I double majored in physics and studio art. I will be applying to M. Arch programs in US for the 2016 fall enrollment. I just would like to know which program I would fit the best.
Here are some details of my education and experience. During my senior year, I did a year-long research in nuclear physics on stopping power and composed a series of landscape photography that was sold for ~$1000. Since I was not studying architecture, I sought experience in the professional world. During my sophomore year, I joined a team of builders to construct two log cabins and a timber residence in South Korea (home country). I also interned for an architectural designer in Palo Alto, California for a month after I graduated. I mostly did CAD work and assisted client meetings. Currently, I am apprenticing a traditional Korean pottery master to learn to throw celadons. I plan on including my final products for the final portfolio.
So, my portfolio will include
They are available to see on my personal website at www.kim-minsung.com. The ceramic works are NOT the work that I am doing right now. They will be much improved.
I am looking at the schools that everyone are looking at. Berkeley, Cornell, Harvard, Yale, MIT… basically the ivies. I do have lower grade, 2.99 and not expecting to recieve an outstanding GRE score, 150-160. I know the choices are very ambitious of me, but I believe they are well worth the investment. I am a little anxious but not discouraged. Rather, I am excited to hear good news from the schools. Maybe I am too optimistic but I believe the decision making professors will recognize me as a valuable student. I did some research to decide which program would fit me the best, but I am not able to judge with confidence at this point. Please share your knowledge or experience to help me make the decision.
stick with nuclear physics.
Chigurh, why are you saying that?? Although I will most likely go for M.Arch still, please elaborate on your reasoning...
you will make more money in physics, architecture is a very difficult profession to get ahead in, it seems like you have other creative outlets that are of interest that will sustain that part of your life while you are working in a stable long term career (physics).
Well, I have been well aware of that. However, I have given up wanting to be rich for some considerable time. Now, could you help me answer the original question? Which architectural school do you think would fit the best?
I have a feeling that your research work would hurt your portfolio unless you turn it into a design project--i.e. some pretty infographic poster or something.. Also your quasi-architectural works need more formatting. Your ceramic work and landscape photography are beautiful I gotta say. If you're in Korea there are a bunch of prep-institutes for M.arch programs and design schools in general. It's not a path I took personally, but have seen many many many Korean fellow students and friends go into top programs, and surprisingly a number of them did well in their graduate studies. If you're lost, try talking to such hakwon's . Used to despise them, but now that I look back, it seems like a pretty good idea to get their help.
@thompsons gazelle Thank you for your comment. I love the idea of info graph. I can think of many possibilities already. I believe info graph will be a very effective. Thank you. Yes, my architectural work need more formatting. I must say, hakwons won't be an option for me since I am occupied learning from a ceramic master in Korea. Could you just point out the biggest problems that you see? I will have to fix it as much as I can using online instructions on YouTube or cad forums. Lastly, based on what you have seen, could you suggest some programs that would fit me the best? That would be much appreciated. Thanks
The schools you're looking into all value ideas over technicality. Your work currently lacks visual explanations about how you ended up with the final product. Adding hand sketches, diagrams (or digital if you're adobe-savvy), process models might be a first step. This is for your research projects and ceramics as well if possible. You also need more design/artistic work.
I still think a hakwon might be a better option for you than to work on more ceramics before applying. If you need more art projects, I assume the hakwon will throw some at you to work on. They provide a studio setting with other applicants, so you could get a lot of feedback compared to working by yourself. Lastly I gotta say, although very similar in style, the portfolios of students who went to hakwon tend to be very sophisticated in layout both in print or digital.
This might be debatable, but I might just say it. Out of the schools you mentioned, whatever school you go to, the quality of education isn't going to be that different. All schools value design and creative thinking, demand hard work, conservative and progressive in different parts. So in terms of best-fit schools for you, it seems like it will depend on which name you want to put on your resume unless you're specifically interested in a particular design topic, professor, pedagogy, or other factors such as networking or which city you want to live for 3+ years.
What about the foundation course of AA school in London? Its very good and renowned course for people who are looking for their first step of architecture, and would be an option for your dream schools. Architecture schools in Europe are very good.
Your strong point I found from your website is artwork; Photos and porcelains are very impressive. And I "do not" want to say like this way.... some of physical graphs you worked still have possibilities to be changed and understood into parametricism - a style within contemporary avant-garde architecture using computer design, according to online dictionary. AA school will be satisfied with amazing artworks from your graphs to porcelains.
Yet, It is still tough for you to enter that of school you mentioned, as well AA, unless you will substantiate more design works and visualisation of your pre-major works.So do some works on your projects to embellish yourself.
So, my recommendation is that you ask yourselves first like, Am I like to study very formal but essential principle of architecture and design, or Am I more like to study something radical and contemporary design tendency, because this process will be a measure for you to anticipate which style of education fit you. As I think, Europe is more based on essential meaning of architecture, and US is more focused on Zeitgeist.
You are interested in specific theory based education in architecture? Consider of Harvard and Columbia. They are very well known for its theory based curriculum, and not just designing something without huge results of your original thinking. You are interested in technology in architecture? Think about MIT, Sci-arc, Pratt, UPenn, and so on.
Thank you both for the response, they are both very helpful.
Your comments on my physics work are quite different from what I expected. I thought the research work is very solid, and that I just need to present the concepts within few pages of my portfolio. I have created some schematics using illustrator in order to deliver the information better (somewhat like info graphics as gazelle mentioned before. I think this might be the "visual explanation" that you mentioned in the second comment. I have attached a pdf file which will be a page of the portfolio. I would love to hear what you think.
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/55303eece4b09f76900a5ccb/t/55bb210ee4b0aac11e3595fc/1438327054600/1.pdf
I would like a well rounded program so that I will be introduced to many aspects of architecture. If what Thompson said about the quality of education is generally true, then I guess it does not really matter within U.S. However, I can certainly imagine that there are larger difference between American programs and European programs. Could you tell me the major differences between European and American? Also, if you could suggest some attractive european programs, that would be fantastic. I have been looking at German programs, since their free tuition policy is so attractive.
Aye aye, I feel that my time is running out, making me somewhat nervous. I hope all goes well haha. to be on the safe side, I will pay a visit to a few hakwons to check out what they could do for me.
New link
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55303eece4b09f76900a5ccb/t/55bb6369e4b088a59201681c/1438344041992/1.pdf
^that is not a portfolio page.
and btw, a 13mbs pdf? That has to break some sort of general relativity law for it to be so big.
I'm sorry its so big. I thought I uploaded the reduced version. Anyway, why are you saying that it is not a portfolio page? I believe it can be in any format... please elaborate on your comment.
I don't say this to be rude, but to try to give constructive advice for putting together a grad school application portfolio...
That page would likely keep you out of most, if not all, competitive programs in the US. It definitely won't help you. The graphics are similar to what would be in a physics textbook, and they don't appear to represent original research but rather show that you understand some concepts. That understanding is already conveyed by the fact you have a degree in the subject, and it can be leveraged to your advantage in your application essay. However, it does not say anything about your design abilities or visual acuity in general. The same can be said of the graphs you show on your web site. An infographic (for instance, see the work of Edward Tufte) is a designed thing with an aesthetic agenda; graphs of data points are not. Infographics are a sort of genre of their own, and I don't think it's necessarily good advice to suggest that someone with no experience of making them start making them now to put in a portfolio.
Fortunately, you seem to have plenty of work that does speak to your visual skills! I would focus more on your studio art work, landscape photos (the stitching together is nice, and I would definitely keep that aspect), and ceramics. Ceramics photos could have more room around the object, or crop the background out entirely. As it is, the area around the objects in the photos is too close and awkward. It would be nice to supplement the photos with some sketches of, for instance, different vessel types (to imply a process), since you seem to have the drawing skills.
The construction photos don't say much about your own design work, but the photos themselves are nice and convey an interest, so a page or two of those would probably work for you.
Basically, the portfolio can have very broad content, but it should all have some sort of creative visual value (not just the purpose to prove knowledge) and speak to your potential as a designer. The red and blue images on your web site under general relativity might be repurposed for a design portfolio; only, don't approach them as proof of scientific knowledge, but rather as an instance where your work in science actually suggested separate formal possibilities. Put another way, no admissions committee is going to be interested in understanding your physics research; they want to see things that look good and show that you can mine your various areas of interest to make things that look good (as well as being intelligent).
As earlier posters said, the CAD work that just shows that you have learned the software doesn't help you. You can put your software knowledge on your CV, but the sorts of schools you are talking about will not care too much that you come in knowing certain softwares (especially AutoCAD and Sketchup, which will not be used at those schools - they mostly use Rhino, with some Maya/ Maxwell/ VRay and others). They will teach you software; they want to know that you will be able to design something interesting once they have taught you the software.
Look through Issuu at application portfolios if you haven't already, to get a sense of the sort of CAD work that is included, and the way studio art work is presented.
Good luck!
"I don't say this to be rude, but to try to give constructive advice for putting together a grad school application portfolio... "
Maybe you're a kinder person than I am, but there's no need for niceties when it comes to this stuff. This is absolute garbage, and the OP needs to be told it is fucking terrible.
How is it possible to make a Squarespace site look that bad? My god. This person will never be a designer of anything.
@redwings
Thank you for your post, I do not find your criticism rude or unsupported. Rather, it was very reasonable and convincing.
After reading your post, I have done some works that have "creative visual values." Here is a link to a two page pdf (2 MB) that I worked on past few hours. It is not formatted for the portfolio, but should be sufficient for the general viewing.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55303eece4b09f76900a5ccb/t/55c0d9bfe4b0b281efad827b/1438702015482/Binder1.pdf
Yes, I agree that the ceramic photos on the website need a lot of working. However, I plan on excluding those. I will be trying to put together images of new ceramic works since they are much more elegant and gracefully done. I will add some line drawings that illustrate the "plan" of a pottery. Also, using symbols that I use in physics, I will add drawings on top of photos to explain the hand motion of throwing.
I sincerely appreciate your input. I will be posting updated works as I go.
Thanks again.
@placebeyondthesplines
As a lurker on this board for a while, I haven't had the impression that you are known for your kindness... but you are usually right, all the same. Still, I have known several students who have transitioned successfully from science or other unrelated fields to design and have been very clueless at first about things many people take for granted (fonts, layouts, colors, whatnot), and I believe design can be taught (to a point) and is not something that requires some kind of inborn baseline. If someone insists on promoting bad images/ layouts as good work though... then no more niceties.
@Min Sung Kim
These are definitely a step in the right direction. It's more about looking interesting and implying that your physics knowledge will translate in some way to design work than about proving any kind of rigor where that translation is involved. Ideally you would have a great narrative to go with it, but that might come later, when you know better how to talk about design.
@redwing
I completely agree. There are students that come from non-design backgrounds that absolutely excel, and some people just need exposure to some design fundamentals to unlock their potential.
This kind of work, however, is so antiseptic and uninterested in human experience that I'd almost argue it presents itself in opposition to thoughtful design, much like the treatment of the Squarespace template, which the OP has actively and purposefully ruined with his completely uninformed "aesthetic." This is the kind of science student that gets frustrated with abstract studio exercises about proportion, composition, scale, form, space, and meaning because those concepts aren't "rationalized" enough for them. The kind who might make great engineers but won't ever be skilled designers.
Thank you both. I realize that I didn't understand the purpose of creating portfolio. I simply thought that showing my past studies. I guess I have been too proud of what I had done. I was lost. I believe that our conversation here have pointed me to creating a portfolio that allows the viewers to see my potential as a designer.
Admittedly, I don't know how, not just yet. Maybe its the problem that I will need to answer before I get anywhere. I was talking to my friend today, and brainstorming with him was very helpful. We were discussing ways to incorporate ceramics into architecture. It is just an idea we had our first meeting. Hopefully, we will improve on it or find something else.
Your criticism was tough at first, but I now see that it was necessary. Almost all of my college friends just praised me for what I had done for the two majors. It was sweet, but misled me to "absolute garbage" haha.
Anyway, I will be working hard to produce a portfolio that would not only get me into a nice grad school, but also develop me as a better designer in the process. It may take years to complete, but I am convinced that I will be an architect sooner or later.
Thank you for your guidance.
Sincerely,
Min
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55303eece4b09f76900a5ccb/t/55c33921e4b031b2fa7bd7f7/1438857505441/Water+and+Mountain+Optimized.pdf
Just another sample....
oops above is earlier version. Here is the correct pdf
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55303eece4b09f76900a5ccb/t/55c354b8e4b0469408929b2c/1438864568252/Water+and+Mountain+3+Optimized.pdf
Its good to see your improve. I know you have been through some of very harsh comments above at the same time you have learned and felt a lot from those of replies. I bet Its just the tip of an iceberg, seeing few harsh words here, compared to studying in Architecture school. The teachers in Architecture school are relatively different. Some of them are very acrid, and the rests seems to be generous sometimes. Both of them, however, have something in common, which is an insight of design in architecture. So they will stop you or give you a feedback at a specific point of your design process; I'm not sure which attitude they are taking to you and your works.
Anyhow, I like your way to say your think to others, not photo itself as the result. May it also be your strong point in the portfolio. I saw your recent work above, and I recommend you to develop how present your think deliberately, not showing your final results off suddenly on pages.
So far, so good! Its good start.