I am currently finishing up a portfolio of my work and I would like to post it on the site so that I can receive any suggestions, critiques or general feedback on the small booklet before I finish it up and begin producing copies.
The intent of the portfolio is to obtain a job in NY, LA or potentially abroad. The portfolio will be printed on 12x18in paper to be folded and trimmed into a booklet with a final size of 8.5x11in.
I graduated from the University of Kansas this past May with my M.ArchI and am currently located in the Midwest. I have previously completed an design internship last fall in Paris. Because of my location I have attempted to include enough information about my projects to possible create the opportunity for firms to feel like they have something substantial enough to entertain hiring someone that is not already living in the city.
You may notice a few holes in the project information boxes, after reading through other critiques on the site about leaving off personal info I went ahead and deleted it for this version. I have two renderings to finish up within the portfolio and am currently working on the cover and table of contents so I have only included the project pages in the issuu document. I also need to go through one last time and do a final check of the text to check readability, grammar and spelling that I haven't fixed along the way.
My main objective for posting this is to receive feedback on how each project reads. Are you provided enough information on each project to form an understanding of the project? Did I present the images and text in an order that worked for you? Did you feel like there were any large voids within a project that kept you from understanding it? And lastly, does the work presented represent a body of work that is worthy of an interview for a starting level position at a design firm?
Thank you for your time, This booklet has taken more time than I had planned but hopefully the final product reflects the commitment.
Below are portfolio spread thumbnails with the project/ page numbers.
and here is a link to the high resolution version on issuu: http://issuu.com/selby/docs/booklet11forweb
This is the first critique of portfolios I always have: they don't understand what is important to the intended audience.
Your's seems to have a legible hierarchy [obvious through your given 'real estate' to each page. Hi Gloss images first, supporting diagrams/drawings second, text third].
This allows multiple readings. If I have 300 portfolios to flip through, I'll only look at your images: if I have only 20 I'll look at your supporting diagrams, if I have 5 I'll read your text.
Congrats on one of the best portfolios I have ever seen on Archinect!
I guess my only criticism might be outside of critiqueing the portfolio and about the work itself. Now, this might be because you've had different professors with different agendas, but it seems like each project was done in isolation with respect to the others. There's no narrative that knits the whole thing together. What does the portfolio say about YOU and your interests? From this I just read that you're very gifted at doing, but not so much at thinking. Is there a way you might unify things a bit?
I think a good case study for marrying graphic design to content across projects is actually to look at Pamphlet Architecture. The works there usually exhibits one keen idea, but does so through the exploration of 3 or 4 or 5 projects. It's a good source for how to marry consistent ideas across varying fields of intervention.
As a slight critique, I might say your sequencing is off, typically you want to start high, middle projects in the middle, and end high. Your last project didnt grab me as much as the others.
Granted, I didn't read any of your text, so the theme might already be in place. And, as I said, this is an excellent portfolio as it is. If I was looking at it either for school acceptance or for a position in a firm, I would consider it. Good luck.
Interesting portfolio, to say the least... If you'd have
My main concern is, as the previous poster pointed out: the order of projects. You start of strong, the second is also strong (but less spectacular) and after that, and then the attention span (for me, personally) gets a bit loosened: I think the Warshaw and film center project could do with more condensing (less pages) - I think the first two projects work really good because they are to the point, while the Warshaw and Film center one show too much to spark my interest - they are a bit more "flat" in presentation, I'd say...
And I agree with the previous poster: your last project is the least strong. Put it somewhere in the middle (i.e. after the first two projects), and the whole is better, in my opinion...
very nice. You have some very nicely presented proejcts there. I don't think the ordering is too much of a concern for me, but I generally agree with usernametaken's comments.
A few random nitpicky points to add to the sequencing points above.
- as this is for work and not school, make sure you provide the key programmatic assumptions for each project. Urbanists will look for this and will be interested in interrogated how your formal solutions match up with those programmatic requirements and not just the quality of the formal solutions themselves. You may already do this (I can't make out the lettering, of course), but if you haven't, consider doing so.
- consider omitting the olive green rendered plan on lower half of page 2 and 3. This is a very well-presented project and I'm a little contracts that one drawing detracts from it a bit. The representation leads to a lot of very finicky questons about the site plan, which you can't really answer effectively given your limited bandwidth to present what is a very complex and comprehensive approach. If you need something to replace it (other than maknig the excellent upper image bigger), consider putting a blow-up axon or simply layed system breakdown the site.
- consider replacing the perspective rendering of your Dumbo film center site with something else... maybe shrink it down and include the perspective rendering elsewhere in the section. As your opening page for the project, I'd be a little concerned that an unclear urban context piece detracts from a suburb and well-articulated building, when you really want to talk about that building. From that opening perspective, it is unclear whether you've designed a cool building or a mediocre park and bulkhead... and you want to make that much absolutely clear.
Congrats on getting this far! Your next challenge will be acquiring technical skills. Try to avoid positions that will pigeon hole you in 3D-modeling and graphic layout roles (unless that's what you want). Judging by the designs (which invoke a slew of very contemporary references) you seem to be very much interested in becoming an architect. All the best kiddo!
Any minor nitpicking would be redundant. I mean, the bottom left image of the film Center (the brick building floating in east river) just looks awkward. Time to start from scratch!
Everyone so far:
Thank you for all of your positive responses and critiques so far. I had debated initially on sharing it on Architect but the comments are really going to help with the final push to get this thing out the door.
jplourde/ Cohesiveness:
I have been working on an introduction to the portfolio to accompany the table of context to help create a bit of wholeness to the collection of individual projects. I have been hesitant to develop it too much because I thought it would be good to avoid having a page of text that may push the amount of reading over the edge. I hope to create an introduction that speaks of me as a designer in relation to my current interests in architecture and the body of work presented. The problem is; how to accomplish this within two paragraphs and still end up with something meaningful. I had also thought about beginning the introduction on the cover but its currently no more than a thought.
Jplourde/ usernametaken/ Order:
I see after the comments I may need to change the order some. I have a couple of different ideas but had kept with the current one because of the logical clarity in the current order. It presents everything in reverse chronological order and I had intended to leave the viewer with the cliff house project in orange because of its lasting effects in the memory. That, and the fear that having it within the other projects would create a weird disconnect with the other, more logical projects.
-/What order do you think would be the best?
Should I end it all with a conclusion to bring it all together instead of attempting to wrangle it all together at the beginning before any work has been seen?
jplourde/ Thought/ Process:
I have tried to explain each project with at least a couple of different "features" of the design and of my thoughts on the project. Its difficult to fully explain anything with much space. I hoped what I have will land a phone call and an interview so that a much better/ fuller explanation could take place - if requested - when meeting in person. I plan to add more if this is the portfolio that eventually becomes the basis for grad school I would expand the depth of each project to really talk about the process and the major design iterations along the way.
Urbanist/ Program Requirements Info:
I omitted some of the program info because it was in the same text box with other info that I didn't want to be publicly available quite yet... I generally list under the title the program size, type and design team, if any. What other type of information would you like to see / know when looking through the project pages?
Urbanist/ Project 1 - pg 2-3, Green Site Plan:
Im curious in what direction the finicky questions would go in? Im Mostly concerned about being prepared in an interview. - Somewhat curious if I could fix the problem and keep the site plan in place.
The desire to keep the green site plan is because I thought it would setup the viewer to understand the two floor plans that are at the same scale on the following spread (pgs 4-5).
Urbanist/ steelstuds/ Film Center / pg 18-19, Intro Page
I see your point with the distant view being a little ambiguous for an opening view. The view had been created from afar to include all the two bridges catering to the Manhattan crowd that would recognize the site and recall the existing brick warehouse that is currently in disrepair on the site.
After looking at the layout with these comments I am thinking it may help to pull off the lower left section on the theater and insert a simple site diagram to explain exactly what and was not being manipulated- half of the brick building, the creation of a plaza and the activation of the adjacent park into an outdoor theater. Maybe I could do a simple "info graphic" overlay / AR overlay type diagram to clarify the site situation....
I could also add a "before" image of the site/ brick building to quickly show a contrast in what I did with the site. Do you think that may help with the readability?
steelstuds/ pigeon hole
I hope and I plan not to be pigeoned hole in anything. I guess it all depends on the type of firm and project. I do hope to gain technical/ construction phase experience. I enjoy the detail as much as Deleuzian philosophy. If a focus begins to push to hard on me there is always the return to school. I that a year or so of work experience in NY can help clarify what I want out of architecture and design to initiate a return to school or possibly something else. At this point I just want a job, if anyone has suggestions on firms that may have a body of work that is in line with my work please feel free to suggest. Im ready for some exposure and to discover some tangible opportunities.
I work in urban design and know that there are some real controversies in representating site plans. Rendered plans are always a bit controversial if they are not diagrammatic in nature. Some questions that jump out at me: what is building is what is landscape?, what is figure and what is ground? it just reads as a vast field of green! what are land-uses? how are these viable real estate product types? how is the site loaded and egressed? (of course I understand what's going on, and I even like it, but this is the type of reaction many older - pre-3d modelling - reviewers, will have). a principal here was looking over my shoulder when I was viewing your portfolio online and he had hyst this reaction - "ugh! look! it's another another olive green landscape-building plan!" My recommendation is just replace it with a diagrammatic plan that actually communicates something other than your ability to render it.
On the Dumbo site, I wasn't concerned that you used that rendering just that I didn't feel it was the right thing to open with. You could make it a small picture and use it for orientation purposes. The problem with it is that the representation emphasizes the park/bulkhead, which isn't really designed. It's unclear (since, at that point in your presentation, you haven't shown them the building design work yet) which is the subject of your intervention.. and the building is designed in a quality way whilst the landscape clearly isn't.
Again, congrats and great job putting this together.
About the pigeonhole hole thing , I agree with Steel Stud. My folio is in the same visual language as this and the first two years of working it was ALL rendering, modeling, and graphics. To this very day I still have a hard time shaking it off as everyone wants my 3D-skills for their projects.
that's why stressing the progam assumptions and analysis - and your building drawings, of course - is as important as the quality of your 3d perspective renderings. I think you're OK as long as you make it clear that your own skillset is balanced. Rendering skills are cheap and commonplace. A well-balanced designer with versatile skills embracing all aspects of the building design workflow chain is a lot more valuable.
At the same time, don't downplay your presentation skills. That's how many of us first got our foot in the door...
If you're intelligent, dedicated and proactive in looking for new opportunities (especially within a smaller firm) you'll be given more and more design responsibilities.
It's foolish to think that straight out of school you'll be hired for anything other than your skills in graphics, modelling, rendering, etc. and your potential for design.
FYI, I was very impressed with this portfolio so I showed it to our Director of Design as an example of what we need to be looking for in our next job fair and open house.
Whatever anyone says, your design and presentation skills are critical in seprating you from the rest of the pool of candidates. It's all about talent and this is the type of work that clearly demonstrates a person's talent in architecture.
I agree with everyone else. Very sexy. Perhaps one of the best I've seen in a long while. I wouldn't want mine in a stack with yours.
My only comment is one that could just as easily be attached to most of the portfolios on here. When I breeze through beautiful works like yours, I'm always left feeling the same way. Wonderful presentation, but I don't have projects on the books that would require that level of rendering or presentation. Perhaps it's jealousy on my part that I don't work at a high-end firm in NY or LA, but the projects that are coming in right now (for me anyways) are pretty 'meat and potatoes'. I could be wrong, but I just don't see enough projects coming through that require that level of sophistication--that's a compliment to you.
I need competent designers that can quickly turn out good quality drawings and run the CA smoothly for simple stuff like: ada retrofits, simple additions, finish upgrades, tenant improvements. (There may be an opportunity for a rendering every once in a while, but most clients don't want to pay for it). At first glance, I might pass you up because I would feel you would become bored very quickly. Again, maybe this is all a moot point, if you're lucky enough to land a job in a place that needs that sort of stuff. (I would assume that you are seeking out firms that do this level of design work). I just haven't been lucky enough to find it. I end up hiring kids with lesser talent because I know that their expectations are in line with the kind of work I have for them.
Best of luck. Your design chops will take you far.
bad ass portfolio ! Excellent graphics. I don't mean to be an asshole but fantasy architecture (except for your housing project) will always look good in anyone's portfolio! U will have no problems finding a job anywhere. I guess I need to redo mine before applying to grad school haha
i dont think what the OP is showing at all counts as fantasy. fantasy is either, for example, Lebbeus Woods, or some of Marc Fornes more obtuse works [Columbia comes to mind]. This isn't fantasy, it's just striving to be avant garde. You need to visit ArchDaily more often.
And how does the architectural thought process typically flow? Fantastic to avant garde to contemporary to standard to banal to abandoned.
I would agree... this isn't "fantasy" by any means... high-profile, high-design, but defiantly within the realm of possible.
Portfolio is great. Good balance of visual content with analytical information. Noticed that the project title/numbers were not the same for the first 2 projects from the rest of the portfolio...easy fix. All in all, this should be a great job getting the interest of an employer.
As several people have pointed out, the small danger with this is that you might have to work to avoid being the "graphics" person in the office. This of course will depend on the office (if they are more design or more production oriented), but it is something to be aware of.
Also as some have pointed out, although this portfolio is fantastic, it may not appeal to offices that don't typically do high-profile/large work. It seems as though you might not be interested in that anyway, but given the nature of the economy you may not have the luxury of picking the office you want to work for. You might want to consider making a second portfolio that appeals to a smaller, less-design office (again, if you feel that you might be applying to some of these firms).
Consider yourself lucky... most people on here are struggling to find ways to make their portfolio standout from the crowd.
CC, in terms of continuity versus longevity versus relevance, an interesting post.
i think it depend on which firms the OP is applying to. I think it works well for an OMA or Morphosis application but not so well for a local architect who might want more pragmatic knowledge.
It's interesting how to tailor one's work to where one want's to be versus how that place might already, a priori, influence one's work.
And for us older folk:how to tailor representation to suit either grad school commitees or competition commitees.
"It's interesting how to tailor one's work to where one want's to be versus how that place might already, a priori, influence one's work."
This job market has really made every job application a difficult and labored process. When you consider that even the smallest, local offices are getting upwards of 300+ applicants for one position, you really have to consider if what you send will respond to the office, application, etc. (not that I have taken my own advice here).
All I can say is that anymore it's a complete crapshot what will land you a job (aside from good connections).
I would never suggest a graduate 'dumb-down' their portfolio--especially if it truly represents you. However, tailoring your work for each firm is a must.
My earlier comments were simply an observation, that, given the economy and the types of projects I see coming in, I might have to pass on an otherwise stellar candidate--not because they don't show promise, but because they show too much promise. (That sounds ridiculous even as I type it). In other words, my fear is that kids coming out of school who have been able to hone their talents and computer skills, will be sadly disappointed when they get out of school and learn that they will have little opportunity to utilize those assets. I would hope that they are as earnest in learning about the other aspects of architecture--you know, the less fun stuff that I really need help with--code research, details, admin.
To the OP, I hope you are able to land a job somewhere that can use your obvious talents.
...not because they don't show promise, but because they show too much promise. (That sounds ridiculous even as I type it).
Actually this is pretty true. Part of the reason I was selected to get laid off from my previous office was because my skill set far surpassed what the office needed and they felt that I was not being utilized (nor would be utilized) in a capacity that would fit where I needed to be as a designer. I've also been told in interviews that although my portfolio is both content and graphically strong (enough to get me in the door for an interview), they felt that they wouldn't be able to provide me with enough "challenging" work to keep me interested. This coming from someone whose portfolio is not nearly as good as this one.
Given the large pool of applicants, offices are in the position to hire someone who fits their needs EXACTLY, be that experience or design sensibility. A strong portfolio could easily eliminate a candidate if the office feels like they may not have the design work to match the candidates needs.
Like I said, I have not followed this advice myself so take it for what it is worth. I actually downplayed my portfolio/work samples to some extent and eliminated the academic work that was too "fantasy architecture" and instead focused on projects, professional and academic, that had more of a basis in reality.
You want to work in LA or NY - good. please stay away from SF - at least until I get my portfolio 1/2 up to your level - I don't want to spen another year on EDD(CA unemployment).
Just kidding - great stuff - try SOM or Gensler - I use to work at SOM and this is the type of work we did. I think Gensler in San Francisco is looking for someone of your background.
Is it generally agreeable its easy to get pigeon holed in any type of office? Or do some types of design environments cater to this more than others? To a degree i'm sure all offices have some problems with this but I would prefer to avoid the firms that do pigeon hole designers because if they have this problem Im sure there are other things about how they run their studio that would be less than desirable.
I am naive and don't have experience working in an office in the states but when I worked in Paris for my internship it seemed to me those pigeon holed were the ones that didn't take initiative to expand their contributions beyond what was clearly directed, didn't show much design talent or didn't express energy to take on tasks they were not directly assigned. The firm I interned at was about 15 people, about 1/3 were interns and worked on competitions for the most part. (Architecture schools in France require several internships before graduation so this is a typical ratio of interns for a small office)
I agree with IamGray in that I didn't receive a fair amount of responsibilities in actual design once I proved I could do more than make 3d models. I really have tailored this portfolio to firms so that I can show that Im competent enough to provide value to the productive output of the firm and prove design skills once Im at the for. This portfolio is meant to receive an interview, not a job, when it comes to the interview I will then have the opportunity to discuss design intent and process much better than within the small booklet.
I have been sort of surprised by all the comments about being over qualified and "boring" job duties. While working on this portfolio and the projects within it there were a million things that were boring or undesirable, but you do them because its what is required to achieve something more. When it comes to happiness in a firm I am much less concerned about the specific tasks and more interested in working with people that feel like they doing Architecture. Unrestricted to architecture I need a challenging environment that I can contribute myself to a collaborative and critical design process. I take on challenges and enjoy finding opportunity and creative problem solving; I cant remember the last time I was bored.
The first two projects have the projects removed just for this post on Archinect because these are the two projects from when I worked in Paris. I plan to include all the information such as client, design team, and program size information in the version I will send to firms.
To be honest I really just want a job in NYC and would be more than happy with any type of firm so that I could establish residence there. I have tailored this portfolio to high design because this is what I want but it is by no means my only work in total. I didn't include the smaller projects that are more about the details but I would probably have a much different portfolio if I was focused on design build type firms.
Exactly my intent- firms like OMA and Morphosis. Do I have a chance? I have no idea.
I feel like the differences between this portfolio and grad school applications would be quite a bit different. If this portfolio was used as the basis for a school applications I would focus more heavily on the design process and the series of decisions that influenced my understanding of architecture beyond the final product shown in the portfolio above.
Architecture as the design of formal solutions allows for a portfolio of glossy renderings but I am ready to move beyond static, form based design. Im really interested in exploring how design can connect to society in more dynamic ways so that architecture can provide a catalyst for making instead of providing a packaged solution. A little fuzzy in concept right now, but I compare it to social websites providing a place for the people that use the site to actually create the content through their personal contribution. For example, the historical idea of a encyclopedia resulted in a fixed collection of books that was written, managed and produced by "the experts" separate from those that actually would be using the final product created. Instead of a static collection of books, wikipedia provides a place for users to contribute their knowledge to a collective body of work that becomes represented as the opportunity provided by a central catalysts.
Did you feel the same about being laid off for being "over qualified"? Did you not have interest in the other work available? I'd like my assists to get me in the door, but I'm interested in learning the whole process which I largely have not much experience in.
I may think and feel differently after the opportunity arrises, I guess time will tell. Im ready to experience it all so that I can develop a better focus and understanding of the wide world of Architecture. I can easily see myself heading in a direction outside of architecture, but my work is in Architecture and my body of work doesn't cater well to firms like IDEO yet.
Short answer: shit TON of photoshop for the most part.
Im curious as to why you might have guessed Cinema 4D? I've opened the program, but I have usually chosen to spend time developing the design instead of learning new 3d programs.
Long answer: I've used mostly Max with Mental Ray and Rhino with Vray, learning max and then moving on to Rhino more recently as my use of grasshopper has grown.
The first two projects were modeled in Rhino and then sent to Labtop to be used for the final renderings. Their work is incredible and I would love to know more about their process. I have been told they spend a lot of time in Photoshop. I've also heard they use Cinema 4D which makes em curious why #dsh5016 asked about Cinema 4D in the first place.
As for my projects, I used the original rendered images I created for the project's jury boards or rendered new views using the existing 3d model, lighting and material setup from my archived files. I sometimes didn't have time to get the final images I wanted during the project so I've used this post grad time to create what I didn't have time to do before.
Warsaw project - Rhino + Vray - lots of photoshop to modify the color and feeling of the opening image.
Film center- Max + Mental Ray - less photoshop than I would like.
Maritime- Max + Mental Ray - some photoshop
Music center- Max + Mental Ray - tons of photoshop
Dali house- Max + Mental Ray - almost no photoshop
I've been using Max + Mental ray for 4 years now, i prefer it over Maya but haven't tried Rhino yet. How do you compare Rhino and Max? I guessed Cinema 4D because a friend of mine showed me a rendering with the same style as yours that was done using cinema 4D. Do you recommend any websites or books that I can look at to improve my portfolio haha?
Rhino is really a lot better at modeling then Max. At first I had a hard time accepting some of the limitations of Rhino when I knew how it could be performed really easily in Max. Rhino really is the future for me when it comes to designing in 3d.
Vray beats mental ray pretty easily because I like the look it produces much more than mental ray. Im not an expert at any of it, more trial and error really. Although the version of Vray in Rhino has some pretty severe limitations in the more complex rendering features compared to Vray for Max.
I really don't have any recommendations. I've mostly only used tutorials for learning grasshopper. Sit at the computer for several hours on end in photoshop and redbull experimenting with the use of blending modes and layer masks; thats my advice.
I cant really say if they were worth it because it was the firm that ordered the images for the two project competitions. I guess they were worth it to a degree because we won the second project that I have in my portfolio. The do charge a lot, but it was impressive to see what they could do in less than 24 hours. For the second project I remember sending them the rhino model the morning of the competition due date and they had final renderings returned to us by the end of that day.
Sep 19, 10 5:46 pm ·
·
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.
Portfolio Critique Request
Hi Everyone,
I am currently finishing up a portfolio of my work and I would like to post it on the site so that I can receive any suggestions, critiques or general feedback on the small booklet before I finish it up and begin producing copies.
Here is a link to it on Issuu: http://issuu.com/selby/docs/booklet11forweb
The intent of the portfolio is to obtain a job in NY, LA or potentially abroad. The portfolio will be printed on 12x18in paper to be folded and trimmed into a booklet with a final size of 8.5x11in.
I graduated from the University of Kansas this past May with my M.ArchI and am currently located in the Midwest. I have previously completed an design internship last fall in Paris. Because of my location I have attempted to include enough information about my projects to possible create the opportunity for firms to feel like they have something substantial enough to entertain hiring someone that is not already living in the city.
You may notice a few holes in the project information boxes, after reading through other critiques on the site about leaving off personal info I went ahead and deleted it for this version. I have two renderings to finish up within the portfolio and am currently working on the cover and table of contents so I have only included the project pages in the issuu document. I also need to go through one last time and do a final check of the text to check readability, grammar and spelling that I haven't fixed along the way.
My main objective for posting this is to receive feedback on how each project reads. Are you provided enough information on each project to form an understanding of the project? Did I present the images and text in an order that worked for you? Did you feel like there were any large voids within a project that kept you from understanding it? And lastly, does the work presented represent a body of work that is worthy of an interview for a starting level position at a design firm?
Thank you for your time, This booklet has taken more time than I had planned but hopefully the final product reflects the commitment.
Below are portfolio spread thumbnails with the project/ page numbers.
and here is a link to the high resolution version on issuu: http://issuu.com/selby/docs/booklet11forweb
> Project 1 - Company Headquarters
pgs 2-3
pgs 4-5
> Project 2 - Housing Project
pgs 6-7
pgs 8-9
> Project 3 - Downtown Warsaw
pgs 10-11
pgs 12-13
pgs 14-15
pgs 16-17
> Project 4 - Film Center
pgs 18-19
pgs 20-21
pgs 22-23
> Project 5 - Maritime Museum
pgs 24-25
pgs 26-27
> Project 6 - Music Center
pgs 28-29
pgs 30-31
> Project 7 - Dali's House
pgs 32-33
Thank you again for your suggestions.
Nice hierarchy of information.
This is the first critique of portfolios I always have: they don't understand what is important to the intended audience.
Your's seems to have a legible hierarchy [obvious through your given 'real estate' to each page. Hi Gloss images first, supporting diagrams/drawings second, text third].
This allows multiple readings. If I have 300 portfolios to flip through, I'll only look at your images: if I have only 20 I'll look at your supporting diagrams, if I have 5 I'll read your text.
Congrats on one of the best portfolios I have ever seen on Archinect!
I guess my only criticism might be outside of critiqueing the portfolio and about the work itself. Now, this might be because you've had different professors with different agendas, but it seems like each project was done in isolation with respect to the others. There's no narrative that knits the whole thing together. What does the portfolio say about YOU and your interests? From this I just read that you're very gifted at doing, but not so much at thinking. Is there a way you might unify things a bit?
I think a good case study for marrying graphic design to content across projects is actually to look at Pamphlet Architecture. The works there usually exhibits one keen idea, but does so through the exploration of 3 or 4 or 5 projects. It's a good source for how to marry consistent ideas across varying fields of intervention.
As a slight critique, I might say your sequencing is off, typically you want to start high, middle projects in the middle, and end high. Your last project didnt grab me as much as the others.
Granted, I didn't read any of your text, so the theme might already be in place. And, as I said, this is an excellent portfolio as it is. If I was looking at it either for school acceptance or for a position in a firm, I would consider it. Good luck.
Interesting portfolio, to say the least... If you'd have
My main concern is, as the previous poster pointed out: the order of projects. You start of strong, the second is also strong (but less spectacular) and after that, and then the attention span (for me, personally) gets a bit loosened: I think the Warshaw and film center project could do with more condensing (less pages) - I think the first two projects work really good because they are to the point, while the Warshaw and Film center one show too much to spark my interest - they are a bit more "flat" in presentation, I'd say...
And I agree with the previous poster: your last project is the least strong. Put it somewhere in the middle (i.e. after the first two projects), and the whole is better, in my opinion...
very nice. You have some very nicely presented proejcts there. I don't think the ordering is too much of a concern for me, but I generally agree with usernametaken's comments.
A few random nitpicky points to add to the sequencing points above.
- as this is for work and not school, make sure you provide the key programmatic assumptions for each project. Urbanists will look for this and will be interested in interrogated how your formal solutions match up with those programmatic requirements and not just the quality of the formal solutions themselves. You may already do this (I can't make out the lettering, of course), but if you haven't, consider doing so.
- consider omitting the olive green rendered plan on lower half of page 2 and 3. This is a very well-presented project and I'm a little contracts that one drawing detracts from it a bit. The representation leads to a lot of very finicky questons about the site plan, which you can't really answer effectively given your limited bandwidth to present what is a very complex and comprehensive approach. If you need something to replace it (other than maknig the excellent upper image bigger), consider putting a blow-up axon or simply layed system breakdown the site.
- consider replacing the perspective rendering of your Dumbo film center site with something else... maybe shrink it down and include the perspective rendering elsewhere in the section. As your opening page for the project, I'd be a little concerned that an unclear urban context piece detracts from a suburb and well-articulated building, when you really want to talk about that building. From that opening perspective, it is unclear whether you've designed a cool building or a mediocre park and bulkhead... and you want to make that much absolutely clear.
Hope that helps.
I think it's pretty bad ass. Very good work.
A++ WOULD VIEW AGAIN!!1!!
Congrats on getting this far! Your next challenge will be acquiring technical skills. Try to avoid positions that will pigeon hole you in 3D-modeling and graphic layout roles (unless that's what you want). Judging by the designs (which invoke a slew of very contemporary references) you seem to be very much interested in becoming an architect. All the best kiddo!
Any minor nitpicking would be redundant. I mean, the bottom left image of the film Center (the brick building floating in east river) just looks awkward. Time to start from scratch!
Everyone so far:
Thank you for all of your positive responses and critiques so far. I had debated initially on sharing it on Architect but the comments are really going to help with the final push to get this thing out the door.
jplourde/ Cohesiveness:
I have been working on an introduction to the portfolio to accompany the table of context to help create a bit of wholeness to the collection of individual projects. I have been hesitant to develop it too much because I thought it would be good to avoid having a page of text that may push the amount of reading over the edge. I hope to create an introduction that speaks of me as a designer in relation to my current interests in architecture and the body of work presented. The problem is; how to accomplish this within two paragraphs and still end up with something meaningful. I had also thought about beginning the introduction on the cover but its currently no more than a thought.
Jplourde/ usernametaken/ Order:
I see after the comments I may need to change the order some. I have a couple of different ideas but had kept with the current one because of the logical clarity in the current order. It presents everything in reverse chronological order and I had intended to leave the viewer with the cliff house project in orange because of its lasting effects in the memory. That, and the fear that having it within the other projects would create a weird disconnect with the other, more logical projects.
-/What order do you think would be the best?
Should I end it all with a conclusion to bring it all together instead of attempting to wrangle it all together at the beginning before any work has been seen?
jplourde/ Thought/ Process:
I have tried to explain each project with at least a couple of different "features" of the design and of my thoughts on the project. Its difficult to fully explain anything with much space. I hoped what I have will land a phone call and an interview so that a much better/ fuller explanation could take place - if requested - when meeting in person. I plan to add more if this is the portfolio that eventually becomes the basis for grad school I would expand the depth of each project to really talk about the process and the major design iterations along the way.
Urbanist/ Program Requirements Info:
I omitted some of the program info because it was in the same text box with other info that I didn't want to be publicly available quite yet... I generally list under the title the program size, type and design team, if any. What other type of information would you like to see / know when looking through the project pages?
Urbanist/ Project 1 - pg 2-3, Green Site Plan:
Im curious in what direction the finicky questions would go in? Im Mostly concerned about being prepared in an interview. - Somewhat curious if I could fix the problem and keep the site plan in place.
The desire to keep the green site plan is because I thought it would setup the viewer to understand the two floor plans that are at the same scale on the following spread (pgs 4-5).
Urbanist/ steelstuds/ Film Center / pg 18-19, Intro Page
I see your point with the distant view being a little ambiguous for an opening view. The view had been created from afar to include all the two bridges catering to the Manhattan crowd that would recognize the site and recall the existing brick warehouse that is currently in disrepair on the site.
After looking at the layout with these comments I am thinking it may help to pull off the lower left section on the theater and insert a simple site diagram to explain exactly what and was not being manipulated- half of the brick building, the creation of a plaza and the activation of the adjacent park into an outdoor theater. Maybe I could do a simple "info graphic" overlay / AR overlay type diagram to clarify the site situation....
I could also add a "before" image of the site/ brick building to quickly show a contrast in what I did with the site. Do you think that may help with the readability?
steelstuds/ pigeon hole
I hope and I plan not to be pigeoned hole in anything. I guess it all depends on the type of firm and project. I do hope to gain technical/ construction phase experience. I enjoy the detail as much as Deleuzian philosophy. If a focus begins to push to hard on me there is always the return to school. I that a year or so of work experience in NY can help clarify what I want out of architecture and design to initiate a return to school or possibly something else. At this point I just want a job, if anyone has suggestions on firms that may have a body of work that is in line with my work please feel free to suggest. Im ready for some exposure and to discover some tangible opportunities.
selby,
I work in urban design and know that there are some real controversies in representating site plans. Rendered plans are always a bit controversial if they are not diagrammatic in nature. Some questions that jump out at me: what is building is what is landscape?, what is figure and what is ground? it just reads as a vast field of green! what are land-uses? how are these viable real estate product types? how is the site loaded and egressed? (of course I understand what's going on, and I even like it, but this is the type of reaction many older - pre-3d modelling - reviewers, will have). a principal here was looking over my shoulder when I was viewing your portfolio online and he had hyst this reaction - "ugh! look! it's another another olive green landscape-building plan!" My recommendation is just replace it with a diagrammatic plan that actually communicates something other than your ability to render it.
On the Dumbo site, I wasn't concerned that you used that rendering just that I didn't feel it was the right thing to open with. You could make it a small picture and use it for orientation purposes. The problem with it is that the representation emphasizes the park/bulkhead, which isn't really designed. It's unclear (since, at that point in your presentation, you haven't shown them the building design work yet) which is the subject of your intervention.. and the building is designed in a quality way whilst the landscape clearly isn't.
Again, congrats and great job putting this together.
Wow, really nice looking. I only skimmed it, but I like the graphics. Your's makes mine look like crap :(
About the pigeonhole hole thing , I agree with Steel Stud. My folio is in the same visual language as this and the first two years of working it was ALL rendering, modeling, and graphics. To this very day I still have a hard time shaking it off as everyone wants my 3D-skills for their projects.
You will encounter the same.
that's why stressing the progam assumptions and analysis - and your building drawings, of course - is as important as the quality of your 3d perspective renderings. I think you're OK as long as you make it clear that your own skillset is balanced. Rendering skills are cheap and commonplace. A well-balanced designer with versatile skills embracing all aspects of the building design workflow chain is a lot more valuable.
At the same time, don't downplay your presentation skills. That's how many of us first got our foot in the door...
If you're intelligent, dedicated and proactive in looking for new opportunities (especially within a smaller firm) you'll be given more and more design responsibilities.
It's foolish to think that straight out of school you'll be hired for anything other than your skills in graphics, modelling, rendering, etc. and your potential for design.
FYI, I was very impressed with this portfolio so I showed it to our Director of Design as an example of what we need to be looking for in our next job fair and open house.
Whatever anyone says, your design and presentation skills are critical in seprating you from the rest of the pool of candidates. It's all about talent and this is the type of work that clearly demonstrates a person's talent in architecture.
I agree with everyone else. Very sexy. Perhaps one of the best I've seen in a long while. I wouldn't want mine in a stack with yours.
My only comment is one that could just as easily be attached to most of the portfolios on here. When I breeze through beautiful works like yours, I'm always left feeling the same way. Wonderful presentation, but I don't have projects on the books that would require that level of rendering or presentation. Perhaps it's jealousy on my part that I don't work at a high-end firm in NY or LA, but the projects that are coming in right now (for me anyways) are pretty 'meat and potatoes'. I could be wrong, but I just don't see enough projects coming through that require that level of sophistication--that's a compliment to you.
I need competent designers that can quickly turn out good quality drawings and run the CA smoothly for simple stuff like: ada retrofits, simple additions, finish upgrades, tenant improvements. (There may be an opportunity for a rendering every once in a while, but most clients don't want to pay for it). At first glance, I might pass you up because I would feel you would become bored very quickly. Again, maybe this is all a moot point, if you're lucky enough to land a job in a place that needs that sort of stuff. (I would assume that you are seeking out firms that do this level of design work). I just haven't been lucky enough to find it. I end up hiring kids with lesser talent because I know that their expectations are in line with the kind of work I have for them.
Best of luck. Your design chops will take you far.
bad ass portfolio ! Excellent graphics. I don't mean to be an asshole but fantasy architecture (except for your housing project) will always look good in anyone's portfolio! U will have no problems finding a job anywhere. I guess I need to redo mine before applying to grad school haha
i dont think what the OP is showing at all counts as fantasy. fantasy is either, for example, Lebbeus Woods, or some of Marc Fornes more obtuse works [Columbia comes to mind]. This isn't fantasy, it's just striving to be avant garde. You need to visit ArchDaily more often.
And how does the architectural thought process typically flow? Fantastic to avant garde to contemporary to standard to banal to abandoned.
I would agree... this isn't "fantasy" by any means... high-profile, high-design, but defiantly within the realm of possible.
Portfolio is great. Good balance of visual content with analytical information. Noticed that the project title/numbers were not the same for the first 2 projects from the rest of the portfolio...easy fix. All in all, this should be a great job getting the interest of an employer.
As several people have pointed out, the small danger with this is that you might have to work to avoid being the "graphics" person in the office. This of course will depend on the office (if they are more design or more production oriented), but it is something to be aware of.
Also as some have pointed out, although this portfolio is fantastic, it may not appeal to offices that don't typically do high-profile/large work. It seems as though you might not be interested in that anyway, but given the nature of the economy you may not have the luxury of picking the office you want to work for. You might want to consider making a second portfolio that appeals to a smaller, less-design office (again, if you feel that you might be applying to some of these firms).
Consider yourself lucky... most people on here are struggling to find ways to make their portfolio standout from the crowd.
CC, in terms of continuity versus longevity versus relevance, an interesting post.
i think it depend on which firms the OP is applying to. I think it works well for an OMA or Morphosis application but not so well for a local architect who might want more pragmatic knowledge.
It's interesting how to tailor one's work to where one want's to be versus how that place might already, a priori, influence one's work.
And for us older folk:how to tailor representation to suit either grad school commitees or competition commitees.
"It's interesting how to tailor one's work to where one want's to be versus how that place might already, a priori, influence one's work."
This job market has really made every job application a difficult and labored process. When you consider that even the smallest, local offices are getting upwards of 300+ applicants for one position, you really have to consider if what you send will respond to the office, application, etc. (not that I have taken my own advice here).
All I can say is that anymore it's a complete crapshot what will land you a job (aside from good connections).
Truth, pragmatics play a role.
The fact that architects are affected more than other professions [some would say first] is cause for interest, if not concern.
I would never suggest a graduate 'dumb-down' their portfolio--especially if it truly represents you. However, tailoring your work for each firm is a must.
My earlier comments were simply an observation, that, given the economy and the types of projects I see coming in, I might have to pass on an otherwise stellar candidate--not because they don't show promise, but because they show too much promise. (That sounds ridiculous even as I type it). In other words, my fear is that kids coming out of school who have been able to hone their talents and computer skills, will be sadly disappointed when they get out of school and learn that they will have little opportunity to utilize those assets. I would hope that they are as earnest in learning about the other aspects of architecture--you know, the less fun stuff that I really need help with--code research, details, admin.
To the OP, I hope you are able to land a job somewhere that can use your obvious talents.
...not because they don't show promise, but because they show too much promise. (That sounds ridiculous even as I type it).
Actually this is pretty true. Part of the reason I was selected to get laid off from my previous office was because my skill set far surpassed what the office needed and they felt that I was not being utilized (nor would be utilized) in a capacity that would fit where I needed to be as a designer. I've also been told in interviews that although my portfolio is both content and graphically strong (enough to get me in the door for an interview), they felt that they wouldn't be able to provide me with enough "challenging" work to keep me interested. This coming from someone whose portfolio is not nearly as good as this one.
Given the large pool of applicants, offices are in the position to hire someone who fits their needs EXACTLY, be that experience or design sensibility. A strong portfolio could easily eliminate a candidate if the office feels like they may not have the design work to match the candidates needs.
Like I said, I have not followed this advice myself so take it for what it is worth. I actually downplayed my portfolio/work samples to some extent and eliminated the academic work that was too "fantasy architecture" and instead focused on projects, professional and academic, that had more of a basis in reality.
You want to work in LA or NY - good. please stay away from SF - at least until I get my portfolio 1/2 up to your level - I don't want to spen another year on EDD(CA unemployment).
Just kidding - great stuff - try SOM or Gensler - I use to work at SOM and this is the type of work we did. I think Gensler in San Francisco is looking for someone of your background.
A F R A M E - What 3D program do you use? Is this Cinema 4D with a shit ton of photoshop?
Is it generally agreeable its easy to get pigeon holed in any type of office? Or do some types of design environments cater to this more than others? To a degree i'm sure all offices have some problems with this but I would prefer to avoid the firms that do pigeon hole designers because if they have this problem Im sure there are other things about how they run their studio that would be less than desirable.
I am naive and don't have experience working in an office in the states but when I worked in Paris for my internship it seemed to me those pigeon holed were the ones that didn't take initiative to expand their contributions beyond what was clearly directed, didn't show much design talent or didn't express energy to take on tasks they were not directly assigned. The firm I interned at was about 15 people, about 1/3 were interns and worked on competitions for the most part. (Architecture schools in France require several internships before graduation so this is a typical ratio of interns for a small office)
I agree with IamGray in that I didn't receive a fair amount of responsibilities in actual design once I proved I could do more than make 3d models. I really have tailored this portfolio to firms so that I can show that Im competent enough to provide value to the productive output of the firm and prove design skills once Im at the for. This portfolio is meant to receive an interview, not a job, when it comes to the interview I will then have the opportunity to discuss design intent and process much better than within the small booklet.
I have been sort of surprised by all the comments about being over qualified and "boring" job duties. While working on this portfolio and the projects within it there were a million things that were boring or undesirable, but you do them because its what is required to achieve something more. When it comes to happiness in a firm I am much less concerned about the specific tasks and more interested in working with people that feel like they doing Architecture. Unrestricted to architecture I need a challenging environment that I can contribute myself to a collaborative and critical design process. I take on challenges and enjoy finding opportunity and creative problem solving; I cant remember the last time I was bored.
#Cherith Cutestory
The first two projects have the projects removed just for this post on Archinect because these are the two projects from when I worked in Paris. I plan to include all the information such as client, design team, and program size information in the version I will send to firms.
To be honest I really just want a job in NYC and would be more than happy with any type of firm so that I could establish residence there. I have tailored this portfolio to high design because this is what I want but it is by no means my only work in total. I didn't include the smaller projects that are more about the details but I would probably have a much different portfolio if I was focused on design build type firms.
#jplourde
Exactly my intent- firms like OMA and Morphosis. Do I have a chance? I have no idea.
I feel like the differences between this portfolio and grad school applications would be quite a bit different. If this portfolio was used as the basis for a school applications I would focus more heavily on the design process and the series of decisions that influenced my understanding of architecture beyond the final product shown in the portfolio above.
Architecture as the design of formal solutions allows for a portfolio of glossy renderings but I am ready to move beyond static, form based design. Im really interested in exploring how design can connect to society in more dynamic ways so that architecture can provide a catalyst for making instead of providing a packaged solution. A little fuzzy in concept right now, but I compare it to social websites providing a place for the people that use the site to actually create the content through their personal contribution. For example, the historical idea of a encyclopedia resulted in a fixed collection of books that was written, managed and produced by "the experts" separate from those that actually would be using the final product created. Instead of a static collection of books, wikipedia provides a place for users to contribute their knowledge to a collective body of work that becomes represented as the opportunity provided by a central catalysts.
#Cherith Cutestory
Did you feel the same about being laid off for being "over qualified"? Did you not have interest in the other work available? I'd like my assists to get me in the door, but I'm interested in learning the whole process which I largely have not much experience in.
I may think and feel differently after the opportunity arrises, I guess time will tell. Im ready to experience it all so that I can develop a better focus and understanding of the wide world of Architecture. I can easily see myself heading in a direction outside of architecture, but my work is in Architecture and my body of work doesn't cater well to firms like IDEO yet.
#dsh5016
Short answer: shit TON of photoshop for the most part.
Im curious as to why you might have guessed Cinema 4D? I've opened the program, but I have usually chosen to spend time developing the design instead of learning new 3d programs.
Long answer: I've used mostly Max with Mental Ray and Rhino with Vray, learning max and then moving on to Rhino more recently as my use of grasshopper has grown.
The first two projects were modeled in Rhino and then sent to Labtop to be used for the final renderings. Their work is incredible and I would love to know more about their process. I have been told they spend a lot of time in Photoshop. I've also heard they use Cinema 4D which makes em curious why #dsh5016 asked about Cinema 4D in the first place.
As for my projects, I used the original rendered images I created for the project's jury boards or rendered new views using the existing 3d model, lighting and material setup from my archived files. I sometimes didn't have time to get the final images I wanted during the project so I've used this post grad time to create what I didn't have time to do before.
Warsaw project - Rhino + Vray - lots of photoshop to modify the color and feeling of the opening image.
Film center- Max + Mental Ray - less photoshop than I would like.
Maritime- Max + Mental Ray - some photoshop
Music center- Max + Mental Ray - tons of photoshop
Dali house- Max + Mental Ray - almost no photoshop
I've been using Max + Mental ray for 4 years now, i prefer it over Maya but haven't tried Rhino yet. How do you compare Rhino and Max? I guessed Cinema 4D because a friend of mine showed me a rendering with the same style as yours that was done using cinema 4D. Do you recommend any websites or books that I can look at to improve my portfolio haha?
was buying labtop renderings worth it, for those projects? they probably cost an arm and a leg! look great, though.
#dsh5016
Rhino is really a lot better at modeling then Max. At first I had a hard time accepting some of the limitations of Rhino when I knew how it could be performed really easily in Max. Rhino really is the future for me when it comes to designing in 3d.
Vray beats mental ray pretty easily because I like the look it produces much more than mental ray. Im not an expert at any of it, more trial and error really. Although the version of Vray in Rhino has some pretty severe limitations in the more complex rendering features compared to Vray for Max.
I really don't have any recommendations. I've mostly only used tutorials for learning grasshopper. Sit at the computer for several hours on end in photoshop and redbull experimenting with the use of blending modes and layer masks; thats my advice.
#jk3hl
I cant really say if they were worth it because it was the firm that ordered the images for the two project competitions. I guess they were worth it to a degree because we won the second project that I have in my portfolio. The do charge a lot, but it was impressive to see what they could do in less than 24 hours. For the second project I remember sending them the rhino model the morning of the competition due date and they had final renderings returned to us by the end of that day.
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.