I haven't followed the old thread, but I saw your old portfolio, and I have to say I liked the old one better. This one is "cleaner", but the old one had more personality...

Also, I think "independent" spells with only E's, no A. Did you run a spell check?

oh hush handsmurf. Canadians are allowed to spell words as they please. It's in the bill of rights.

I like the new version very much! One major complaint though: All of your black and white drawings come across as being extremely harsh. Random observations of such:

-page 42. Gray roads and black outlines of buildings. It looks bad as far as a graphical representation is concerned.
-page 38. Line-weights of the section. They all look the same. It makes an otherwise interesting section look horrible.
-page 46. Black blob on the chapel level really distracts from reading the plan. I would make the lobby level bigger than other plans.
-page 24/25. Site plan looks bad. One line-weight for everything ruins it.
-etc...

Your later work deals with this much better. Page 9 axos introduce soft grays. Page 19 has great line-weights. Diagrams on page 23 use color in a good way.

I recommend softening up the rest of your drawings. Otherwise, the story telling is much stronger in this version. Thumbs up man!

ps. why does one of the plans on page 32 have such a darker shadow than the rest? Does proposal B account for our sun going supernova? :)

this is a very sharp portfolio, and it really is of the calibre to submit with applications. That said I do agree with hansdampf that it does miss some of the tactile (read: rough and unpolished) nature of the first one.

steelstuds: Thanks, your previous crit did help me reevaluate what exactly I wanted to communicate with the portfolio, and how to to do so. This is why I decided to abandon some of my more formal gestures, and focus on the basic structure for a while.

I'll take a look at strengthening those line drawings. It'll be tough though, some of the work you mentioned I don't even have the original CAD files for (i.e. all my Arquitectonica work)!

hansdampf and architechnophilia: This is interesting, I had to take a second look at my old portfolio to see what exactly you guys meant. I like the direction my portfolio development has been taking, specifically that version two is more simple, clear and therefore I think, more effective at presenting the work.

That being said I liked the comment about tactility, and I think there are places where I could reintroduce certain gestures from version one - but more strategically! I'll keep it in mind for V.3 .

Which won't be for a while, I want to focus on finishing up some competitions before I tackle the next iteration, which will include new work.

Thanks for the comments.

Hey burke. Don't worry about not having the original CAD files. You have to keep in mind your site plan (or any line drawing in your portfolio) is as much of a 'graphic' as your best rendering. You are conveying spacial ideas to prospective audiences. A construction document is a completely different beast.

You can easily photoshop in a splash of wow in the drawings I mentioned. You can make some lines look fainter. You can add some gray and color shades. Just play around with it. I will take you no time.

Otherwise, do post the V3.0 once it's ready!

looks good the only thing i could think of. you may want to putting your professional experience first.