My new employment shtick is creating a new portfolio every 6 or so weeks. I've been working on this on and off for about 5 days now. Might send it off to a potential employer soon.
the images float too much. you need some sort of graphic "anchor" to create some continuity between pages, and to ground the images for each individual page. i appreciate the fact that it is simple and clean, but it is a little TOO clean, and almost sterile. good luck.
i don't think your new shtick will yield great results. Portfolios should be about your best work, not just the newest.
Its easy to pump out 1000 decent chairs, but harder to show a thoughtfully designed, complex project that you've invested alot of time into: diagrams, context, drawing, rendering, site plan, text.
Remember, just because something is "interesting" and "new" doesn't mean its necessarily "good."
Just for the record, this portfolio IS for an architecture job right?
If so - you'll be in for a rude awakening when you find very few firms calling you back. I mean as I looked through it, I had my "where do I even begin" look. I'm not trying to be rude here at all.
The work itself is pretty average. You do have a penchant for detail (which is great) and an interest in furniture, but there is no boldness in any of your work therefore making it a generally lackluster body of work. You can improve this by giving your layouts more graphics -- not saying go to town on the graphics but something!
Look at other folios posted here to see what direction you see yourself going in. And also never hesitate to look at others peoples work for inspiration.
I've known a lot of people who never expressed an iota of interest in what their colleages do and their own work quality ended up taking a huge nosedive and consequently diminishing their chances of employment....
This has to be one of the worst portfolios I've seen! Try looking up some of the previous portfolios posted on here so you can see what you are up against....fix what you have and post it again, but right now...its not even worth commenting.
Are you in school? What year? Is this for employment?
What the hell is up with those hidden line drawings???
Sorry to be so rude about it, but better me than some employer...if you get a chance to sit down with an employer with this!
It's like 80's Bulgarian-style re-envisioning of 50's Danish style furniture. Even soviet-Russians need some Ikea love. The portfolio even shows you how to build all of this yourself! How's that for 2 for 1 value!
Keep up the good work. Your next book should be themed around re-envisioning greatest world engineering feats as North Korean bicycle bridges.
what happened to the squash farm? I 2nd the general opinion to look at tons of other people's work and spend those 6 or so weeks doing one good project at a time.
I think you just need to sit down and put a little more focus into your portfolio. It's really funny how some of the furniture looks like the chairs my cousin has in her house. Kind of amusing actually.
If it were a joke, it should have been an ikea catalog of how to assemble various phallic objects with weird Scandinavian names (which eventually assembles into one grand phallic statement).
where's the irreverence and creativity? you've posted far better humorous photomontages on these forums. Your series of proposals for a new GSD facility would have made a much stronger portfolio.
why? because you took a basic premise - over-the-top stereotypes of a particular institution - and turned it into an architectural exploration.
there's not enough rigor and evidence of any thought process for this to be a compelling collection of work - fake or not fake.
if so, not to be a dick, but it seems like you're trying to pass the 'soft-wall' concept off as your own in your portfolio (flickr). Seeming as it's an integral part of your thesis, you should at least be giving credit to the people who actually designed it. The same goes for the seating.
What benefit is there to creating a new portfolio that often?
As someone else already said, I think focusing more on your best projects not just your newest ones might be a better option.
To show that you can constantly produce work. Perhaps since almost all of my experience is in mass media and marketing, I have a different (but not necessarily better) perspective.
I think if you went the standard route through the regular channels, an orthodox portfolio necessarily makes some sense. However, I don't particularly find most architectural portfolios to really be anything about architecture or design even despite being filed with architecture and design. If over the course of 7 years, all you can show me is 5 projects over 40 pages... well, I'm frankly not impressed.
The only real benefit to producing a lot of work is that you have more to sort through. That and it proves that you can produce a lot of work. However, I tend to apply to the same places every three months. So, I like to give them something new to look at other than the same old portfolio.
I've been focusing a lot more of my intention of micro projects because they are fundamentally easier and taking a project from concept to reality is well with in my skill set. What's the point of designing a skyscraper or siting a building with over 100,000 sq. ft. when I can't even detail a floor plate connector or have the data necessary to calculate trip generation?
I like your portfolio. I'd suggest going ahead and submitting it as is and with no additional changes. There is certainly nothing wrong in designing a nice piece of furniture and I like your work. Good luck!
If it were a joke, it should have been an ikea catalog of how to assemble various phallic objects with weird Scandinavian names (which eventually assembles into one grand phallic statement).
It wasn't really intended to be a 'funny ha-ha' joke. More of a testing the waters.
where's the irreverence and creativity?
Wanted it to be 'structurally' devoid of any personality, actually.
The basic premise of this thread was to gauge what the actual response would be to stale-but-competent-and-somewhat-passable design... both in actual product and in graphical presentation.
Architects, other than soft services, sell one thing-- near accurate to 1/10th of an inch detailed descriptions in the form of drawings. Are long ramble-filled paragraphs about inspiration, proposed circulation and usage ideals accurate descriptions?
The idea behind a portfolio devoid of any literary content was certain around the idea of more universal communication. What if I sent a lengthy lofty portfolio to someone who predominately speaks French, Japanese, Norsk or German? Will they understand the subtleties and nuances in the same capable manner that a native English speaker would?
The 8.5 by 11 or A4 paper size does not lend itself to any particularly good layout approach. It is possible. But I think at that paper size, lots of information becomes overwhelming. The intention was to have one idea per page-- renders express the idea of final product and finish, hidden-line drawings show off more the technical aspect.
The basic premise here was to make the most minimalist, to-the-point project and present it in the most universal way possible.
As for the graphical flourishes, I tend to avoid those like the plague unless you're making non-serious marketing materials or club fliers. Once the PDF leaves my e-mail, I no longer have any control as to how it is viewed, printed or handled.
Which is graphical 'bullshit.' And that was more or less the idea here was to present concepts sans bullshit.
Really, if I was to send out a non-serious joke portfolio (aka a standard graphic design portfolio)-- 45% of would be inane nonsense, 30% of it would be pornography mash-ups and the remaining 25% would be obnoxiously colored pages with one liners in large ultra bold font talking about how awesome I am.
Based on this article, I too think that it is time to throw in the towel and make a career change to related fields that are actually hiring.
If you are trying to get a job in furniture design/product design, this is a good start. An architecture portfolio will not get you a job in furniture design or product design. I would keep it only furniture/products and use one page per piece - showing rendering, plan, front/side views and details. I would re-render the materials in a better rendering program. Use some brighter colors, add title/descriptions, etc.
Additional and relation wall systems-- patents in 1987 (fabric covered wall system), 1988 (movable soft athletic court walls) and 1994 (flexible foam-based wall systems.)
Which is kind of funny because switch called you out in a legitimate concern. In which case, the very thing you're offended about is the same exact thing you did to my trial, 'trolling' portfolio.
There's nothing wrong with appropriate in art and design... but when you use other peoples work in your own versions of your own designs, you should cite and document those appropriations.
If you were completely unaware that such things exist... then perhaps you didn;t study the subject in depth enough. And if you hadn't studied the concept enough.... perhaps you shouldn't be putting it in your portfolio.
That's the pitfalls of trying to put untested hypotheticals, ideas and practices in your portfolio.
This is more of a question than a critique, but I am wondering how potentially employers are responding to getting a barrage of portfolios every few weeks from the same candidate, regardless of it the work is different? Is that working out for you?
Sure, it shows (as you say) a degree of being able to produce some catalog of work in a short amount of time but it also sends the message that you are unable to edit and self-evaluate your own work. Not to say that portfolios are sacred, but there is a degree of using it as a vessel to showcase only the best work or the work that is most representative of the applicant, which is likely why you find people with "7 years, all you can show me is 5 projects over 40 pages" (although I hope not 40 pages...see paragraph 2!). Taking the effort to "portfolioize" each and every design exploration you have done makes them all too precious and too self-important, and for me leads me to question your degree of design judgment and discretion (which is absolutely not your intention.)
Taking into account the "mass media" background, it seems like the real issue here is that maybe a portfolio is just not the right medium for your particular needs. Essentially what you are doing now is equating portfolio with a twitter account or blog, when in reality a blog/website would probably serve your needs better.
Rather than sending a portfolio every 3 months to herald a new publication, you could just mail a postcard teaser, which would give offices the choice to participate or not. Sure, shoving the portfolio in their face doesn't give them an option, but it also pisses people off. If the work is good enough to draw interest than it doesn't need to jump in your face.
This is more of a question than a critique, but I am wondering how potentially employers are responding to getting a barrage of portfolios every few weeks from the same candidate, regardless of it the work is different? Is that working out for you?
Well. Nothing is working out for me-- whether orthodox or unorthodox. However, the firms I tend to apply to are your typical big name firms.
I've started doing collections for the simple reason that many of these firms, like HOK are now moving into product and furniture design. This was something I have been hoping to see happen and have been quite explicit about the necessity of diversification.
But, in my experiences and judging by the experiences of others, the idea of producing a large amount of design work and then sifting through it is pretty common throughout the design industry-- you wouldn't have sample sales, half a dozen mockups per advertisement, tear sheets or even carpet samples if it wasn't for design overkill.
Now, for more expensive and laborious tasks-- oh, hello. video editing-- design overkill is a budget killer. But, even then, you'll still see three or four versions of the same thing.
However, if the business of architecture is moving into collections and series... then options and variations might become the practice de jure.
Rather than sending a portfolio every 3 months to herald a new publication, you could just mail a postcard teaser, which would give offices the choice to participate or not. Sure, shoving the portfolio in their face doesn't give them an option, but it also pisses people off. If the work is good enough to draw interest than it doesn't need to jump in your face.
As to this, this is why these pages are devoid of content. It doesn't take more than 2 minutes to go through a 50 page portfolio in my simplified design portfolio. Which may not be a good thing but I'm not trying to lure them into a time investment.
The only thing I can say is that I am usually getting an email back every single time I email something out. I'd estimate it at 2/3rds rate of return. The emails aren't spectacular or even hope inducing but they aren't blatantly negative either.
I would argue that some offices (not all) have gotten into the business of furniture and products not out of a sincere interest in diversification, but as a stop-gap measure to bring in cash while the building business is down. For the same reasons that Disney forces a microphone and a CD deal in front of every teen actor/actress they have on contract, firms like HOK can use their largess in the design industry to sell products that may or may not be of any notable quality. This isn't exactly a far stretch from the offices that advertise as being architecture and graphic design, regardless of the fact that no one employed at said office has had any instruction in graphic design. Or the frequent touting of LEED professionals employed, and yet zero LEED projects produced. It's a matter of marking with cheap words fulfilled with a wish and a promise.
As for architecture moving into a "collection"; this is a road that has been traveled before with various "architecture and fashion/other design medium" exhibitions, monographs and lectures that haven't really exposed any new discoveries or answered any questions. Buildings take far too long to design and construct, nevermind the expense OR the quantity of people that are involved in the process, to be "fashionable" in the immediate sense of change and progress. I use Zaha as a clear example of someone who was been working for a considerable amount of time as a designer, but is only just now amassing a quantity of built work with which to evaluate, not due to want or will. The Disney Concert Hall should have been Gehry's great experiment, but that honor ended up being bestowed to Bilbao. Architecture just has far too many factors beyond itself to be the medium of progress it would like to think it is. Clothing can be "reinvented" every 2 weeks because the production time is short, the people involved are minimal, and the production costs are far offset by the retail. Sure, BIM has been promoted as the means to reduce inefficiency, speed production and make Architecture a more responsive medium, but I think we have a long way to go and I have my doubts that a software platform can be the saving grace of the profession.
I would say if what you have been doing has been working (to some degree) than keep on keeping on. It would seem like an offices in the realm of HOK might respond more to a portfolio that isn't as a singularly focused as your current model, but instead demonstrated a breadth of design work in several disciplines, unless of course you are vying for a position solely doing product design/furniture. If you are getting responses, than obviously you are generating some degree of interest, although I hope said communication is coming from an actual human and not an automation.
My next comment than is that if this idea of collections, i.e. seriality is an interest of yours, then it seems like you really divest in a more rigorous study (or demonstrate that you have). Rather than just pumping out a new, disassociated set of furniture and product design models every 3 months, use something like the any publications as a precedence- devoting each publication to a singular issue. Make a reason to care that a new portfolio is being made, sent and received 4 times a year other than for the sheer act of making something, otherwise your audience is going to get real bored, real quick. I think this might also help you to place your work within some context, even if that dialog is not made explicit. I do think the complete lack of text is not helping you any. I get that images are universal, but without framing this with even a mono-syllabic title you leave your audience to question (as you have seen) the purpose of this document.
Finally, I have to ask- why bother soliciting feedback if you have already developed a process and a working method that is producing results you are apparently satisfied with? I again question the level of self-editing and discretion but than again I have been reading a lot of postmodern fiction so maybe I'm just in that mindset.
If 'brick wall' is credited to your name in the permanent collection at the MoMA, the you've got yourself a deal and your cheque is in the mail.
@iheartbooks -
Yes I only saw a few diagrams, but conversely, that's all you showed in your portfolio, which is generally a rather standalone document. Your soft wall diagrams are nearly identical to the ones they have in their catalogues, the name is the same, and your rendered seating is identical to theirs as well. If you credited them elsewhere I apologize, but surely you can see where I'm coming from. I'd assume you'd want credit if someone was to publicly use your own work? They probably would want the same.
I'm not trying to be mean, I simply wanted to bring attention to what I see as a very important point - clearly making references to ideas that are not your own. I personally don't think that's such a dickhead concept, but call me crazy (or a dickhead if you wish).
If over the course of 7 years, all you can show me is 5 projects over 40 pages... well, I'm frankly not impressed.
clearly you've never worked in an architecture office nor have you taken an architecture studio in an architecture program.
Architects, other than soft services, sell one thing-- near accurate to 1/10th of an inch detailed descriptions in the form of drawings. Are long ramble-filled paragraphs about inspiration, proposed circulation and usage ideals accurate descriptions?
wrong - we sell ideas (solutions to particular problems) and our ability to execute said ideas architecturally.
if you are going for the latter, you are selling your technical competence, and quite frankly, this current offering is amateur at best. Most people just starting out tend to focus on the former (which includes sexy rendering skills and overly descriptive nonsense) because only through experience do we learn how to execute design.
both aspects of the profession rely very heavily on our ability to communicate* to the client and the contractor, and if I look at your portfolio and have no clue what is going on, you've failed at convincing me, your audience, your ability to contribute in an architecture firm.
listen to cherith - if you are pursuing some kind of rigor in your ikea-esque furniture study, you need to show just that - rigor... I mentioned before that your two or three photo-shopped renderings of GSD facilities held far more interest than the entire content of this portfolio simply because I could understand the premise behind them.
*good communication does not need to be entirely verbal, but it needs to follow some kind of understandable narrative. diagrams are particularly useful if you are going "universal."
I'm actually trying to be helpful. I think you have talent as a provocateur - there has to be some way to work that to your advantage without constantly pissing people off or slinging verbal feces at them the moment they extend a hand. you also have good photoshop skills and apparently strong internet search/research skills based on the amount of unique hot pornographic action you post around here.
or if you are truly Abulafia, then I'll meet you at the louvre at midnight.
i am really only interested in the fact that no one reacted to the article that was posted. arguing over the "portfolio" is like polishing the deck chairs on the titanic on its way down. it's nice to see some hard data about the layoffs though. Mr. Baker at least recognizes the problem more than the AIA does. if this is for another thread i apologize. but since fixing THAT is the only way a portfolio will even make any difference, i don't think it is....
Oct 26, 10 3:46 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.
Critique My Oct./Nov. Portfolio (work in progress)
I don't know how much Issuu is going to destroy this. But here it is.
http://issuu.com/theunicorn/docs/sofar
My new employment shtick is creating a new portfolio every 6 or so weeks. I've been working on this on and off for about 5 days now. Might send it off to a potential employer soon.
Missing a lot. Will keep posting updates.
Should I continue or should I stop?
too white
the images float too much. you need some sort of graphic "anchor" to create some continuity between pages, and to ground the images for each individual page. i appreciate the fact that it is simple and clean, but it is a little TOO clean, and almost sterile. good luck.
I haven't added the the headers and footers yet. That's coming once I find a stopping point with content.
My opinion: stop.
i don't think your new shtick will yield great results. Portfolios should be about your best work, not just the newest.
Its easy to pump out 1000 decent chairs, but harder to show a thoughtfully designed, complex project that you've invested alot of time into: diagrams, context, drawing, rendering, site plan, text.
Remember, just because something is "interesting" and "new" doesn't mean its necessarily "good."
I would recommend slowing down and editing a bit.
Just for the record, this portfolio IS for an architecture job right?
If so - you'll be in for a rude awakening when you find very few firms calling you back. I mean as I looked through it, I had my "where do I even begin" look. I'm not trying to be rude here at all.
The work itself is pretty average. You do have a penchant for detail (which is great) and an interest in furniture, but there is no boldness in any of your work therefore making it a generally lackluster body of work. You can improve this by giving your layouts more graphics -- not saying go to town on the graphics but something!
Look at other folios posted here to see what direction you see yourself going in. And also never hesitate to look at others peoples work for inspiration.
I've known a lot of people who never expressed an iota of interest in what their colleages do and their own work quality ended up taking a huge nosedive and consequently diminishing their chances of employment....
This has to be one of the worst portfolios I've seen! Try looking up some of the previous portfolios posted on here so you can see what you are up against....fix what you have and post it again, but right now...its not even worth commenting.
Are you in school? What year? Is this for employment?
What the hell is up with those hidden line drawings???
Sorry to be so rude about it, but better me than some employer...if you get a chance to sit down with an employer with this!
Cheers!
Where is your compassion poop?
These are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but for your reference Unicorn:
Academic:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leemasonrobert/sets/72157622353055569/
Freelance:
http://stayarch.carbonmade.com/
Bad day I guess! I am very sorry!
Up mine! I like it.
It's like 80's Bulgarian-style re-envisioning of 50's Danish style furniture. Even soviet-Russians need some Ikea love. The portfolio even shows you how to build all of this yourself! How's that for 2 for 1 value!
Keep up the good work. Your next book should be themed around re-envisioning greatest world engineering feats as North Korean bicycle bridges.
LOL!
steelstuds you just about made me fall out of my chair...
North Korean bicycle bridges... LOL
Thank you for putting a little happiness on my side of the block today.
Ok, well given Unicorn's history on archinect I just have to ask if this is a serious discussion thread.
what happened to the squash farm? I 2nd the general opinion to look at tons of other people's work and spend those 6 or so weeks doing one good project at a time.
I think you just need to sit down and put a little more focus into your portfolio. It's really funny how some of the furniture looks like the chairs my cousin has in her house. Kind of amusing actually.
ikea.
i also think this is humour.
considering he has ignored the thread for a week, and given his other posts, I'd also guess it was a joke
yeah. i guess it was a joke. not cool!
No. It was not a joke. You guys broke Unicorn's fucking feelings.
Be nicer when the Dec./Jan. issue comes out. OK?
derp
"My new employment shtick is creating a new portfolio every 6 or so weeks"
What benefit is there to creating a new portfolio that often?
As someone else already said, I think focusing more on your best projects not just your newest ones might be a better option
fine - I'll bite.
If it were a joke, it should have been an ikea catalog of how to assemble various phallic objects with weird Scandinavian names (which eventually assembles into one grand phallic statement).
where's the irreverence and creativity? you've posted far better humorous photomontages on these forums. Your series of proposals for a new GSD facility would have made a much stronger portfolio.
why? because you took a basic premise - over-the-top stereotypes of a particular institution - and turned it into an architectural exploration.
there's not enough rigor and evidence of any thought process for this to be a compelling collection of work - fake or not fake.
@iheartbooks - are those links your of work?
if so, not to be a dick, but it seems like you're trying to pass the 'soft-wall' concept off as your own in your portfolio (flickr). Seeming as it's an integral part of your thesis, you should at least be giving credit to the people who actually designed it. The same goes for the seating.
As someone else already said, I think focusing more on your best projects not just your newest ones might be a better option.
To show that you can constantly produce work. Perhaps since almost all of my experience is in mass media and marketing, I have a different (but not necessarily better) perspective.
I think if you went the standard route through the regular channels, an orthodox portfolio necessarily makes some sense. However, I don't particularly find most architectural portfolios to really be anything about architecture or design even despite being filed with architecture and design. If over the course of 7 years, all you can show me is 5 projects over 40 pages... well, I'm frankly not impressed.
The only real benefit to producing a lot of work is that you have more to sort through. That and it proves that you can produce a lot of work. However, I tend to apply to the same places every three months. So, I like to give them something new to look at other than the same old portfolio.
I've been focusing a lot more of my intention of micro projects because they are fundamentally easier and taking a project from concept to reality is well with in my skill set. What's the point of designing a skyscraper or siting a building with over 100,000 sq. ft. when I can't even detail a floor plate connector or have the data necessary to calculate trip generation?
I like your portfolio. I'd suggest going ahead and submitting it as is and with no additional changes. There is certainly nothing wrong in designing a nice piece of furniture and I like your work. Good luck!
It wasn't really intended to be a 'funny ha-ha' joke. More of a testing the waters.
where's the irreverence and creativity?
Wanted it to be 'structurally' devoid of any personality, actually.
The basic premise of this thread was to gauge what the actual response would be to stale-but-competent-and-somewhat-passable design... both in actual product and in graphical presentation.
Architects, other than soft services, sell one thing-- near accurate to 1/10th of an inch detailed descriptions in the form of drawings. Are long ramble-filled paragraphs about inspiration, proposed circulation and usage ideals accurate descriptions?
The idea behind a portfolio devoid of any literary content was certain around the idea of more universal communication. What if I sent a lengthy lofty portfolio to someone who predominately speaks French, Japanese, Norsk or German? Will they understand the subtleties and nuances in the same capable manner that a native English speaker would?
The 8.5 by 11 or A4 paper size does not lend itself to any particularly good layout approach. It is possible. But I think at that paper size, lots of information becomes overwhelming. The intention was to have one idea per page-- renders express the idea of final product and finish, hidden-line drawings show off more the technical aspect.
The basic premise here was to make the most minimalist, to-the-point project and present it in the most universal way possible.
As for the graphical flourishes, I tend to avoid those like the plague unless you're making non-serious marketing materials or club fliers. Once the PDF leaves my e-mail, I no longer have any control as to how it is viewed, printed or handled.
Which is graphical 'bullshit.' And that was more or less the idea here was to present concepts sans bullshit.
Really, if I was to send out a non-serious joke portfolio (aka a standard graphic design portfolio)-- 45% of would be inane nonsense, 30% of it would be pornography mash-ups and the remaining 25% would be obnoxiously colored pages with one liners in large ultra bold font talking about how awesome I am.
Based on this article, I too think that it is time to throw in the towel and make a career change to related fields that are actually hiring.
If you are trying to get a job in furniture design/product design, this is a good start. An architecture portfolio will not get you a job in furniture design or product design. I would keep it only furniture/products and use one page per piece - showing rendering, plan, front/side views and details. I would re-render the materials in a better rendering program. Use some brighter colors, add title/descriptions, etc.
Wow. You try to be helpful and someone shits on your work.
Switch, you saw a few drawings and diagrams. Its unfair to make those kind of assumptions. Thats such a dickhead comment.
I don’t mean to harp on the point switch, but that comment really bothered me. It was both unnecessary and totally incorrect.
It’s funny how even the most confident designers can turn a little soft and self-conscious when their work is criticized in a public way.
If I’m going to put my work out there I guess I just need to get used to it.
No hard feelings.
@iheartbooks
Softwall system:
Molo walls, won a big award in 2005.
Additional and relation wall systems-- patents in 1987 (fabric covered wall system), 1988 (movable soft athletic court walls) and 1994 (flexible foam-based wall systems.)
Which is kind of funny because switch called you out in a legitimate concern. In which case, the very thing you're offended about is the same exact thing you did to my trial, 'trolling' portfolio.
There's nothing wrong with appropriate in art and design... but when you use other peoples work in your own versions of your own designs, you should cite and document those appropriations.
If you were completely unaware that such things exist... then perhaps you didn;t study the subject in depth enough. And if you hadn't studied the concept enough.... perhaps you shouldn't be putting it in your portfolio.
That's the pitfalls of trying to put untested hypotheticals, ideas and practices in your portfolio.
appropriation*
I think I'm going to patent "means to put clay rectangles in a vertical pattern".
All you mofos better gimme credit when you show a brick wall in your portfolio. Royalty payments too.
This is more of a question than a critique, but I am wondering how potentially employers are responding to getting a barrage of portfolios every few weeks from the same candidate, regardless of it the work is different? Is that working out for you?
Sure, it shows (as you say) a degree of being able to produce some catalog of work in a short amount of time but it also sends the message that you are unable to edit and self-evaluate your own work. Not to say that portfolios are sacred, but there is a degree of using it as a vessel to showcase only the best work or the work that is most representative of the applicant, which is likely why you find people with "7 years, all you can show me is 5 projects over 40 pages" (although I hope not 40 pages...see paragraph 2!). Taking the effort to "portfolioize" each and every design exploration you have done makes them all too precious and too self-important, and for me leads me to question your degree of design judgment and discretion (which is absolutely not your intention.)
Taking into account the "mass media" background, it seems like the real issue here is that maybe a portfolio is just not the right medium for your particular needs. Essentially what you are doing now is equating portfolio with a twitter account or blog, when in reality a blog/website would probably serve your needs better.
Rather than sending a portfolio every 3 months to herald a new publication, you could just mail a postcard teaser, which would give offices the choice to participate or not. Sure, shoving the portfolio in their face doesn't give them an option, but it also pisses people off. If the work is good enough to draw interest than it doesn't need to jump in your face.
Just my 2 cents.
potential.
Well. Nothing is working out for me-- whether orthodox or unorthodox. However, the firms I tend to apply to are your typical big name firms.
I've started doing collections for the simple reason that many of these firms, like HOK are now moving into product and furniture design. This was something I have been hoping to see happen and have been quite explicit about the necessity of diversification.
But, in my experiences and judging by the experiences of others, the idea of producing a large amount of design work and then sifting through it is pretty common throughout the design industry-- you wouldn't have sample sales, half a dozen mockups per advertisement, tear sheets or even carpet samples if it wasn't for design overkill.
Now, for more expensive and laborious tasks-- oh, hello. video editing-- design overkill is a budget killer. But, even then, you'll still see three or four versions of the same thing.
However, if the business of architecture is moving into collections and series... then options and variations might become the practice de jure.
Rather than sending a portfolio every 3 months to herald a new publication, you could just mail a postcard teaser, which would give offices the choice to participate or not. Sure, shoving the portfolio in their face doesn't give them an option, but it also pisses people off. If the work is good enough to draw interest than it doesn't need to jump in your face.
As to this, this is why these pages are devoid of content. It doesn't take more than 2 minutes to go through a 50 page portfolio in my simplified design portfolio. Which may not be a good thing but I'm not trying to lure them into a time investment.
The only thing I can say is that I am usually getting an email back every single time I email something out. I'd estimate it at 2/3rds rate of return. The emails aren't spectacular or even hope inducing but they aren't blatantly negative either.
I would argue that some offices (not all) have gotten into the business of furniture and products not out of a sincere interest in diversification, but as a stop-gap measure to bring in cash while the building business is down. For the same reasons that Disney forces a microphone and a CD deal in front of every teen actor/actress they have on contract, firms like HOK can use their largess in the design industry to sell products that may or may not be of any notable quality. This isn't exactly a far stretch from the offices that advertise as being architecture and graphic design, regardless of the fact that no one employed at said office has had any instruction in graphic design. Or the frequent touting of LEED professionals employed, and yet zero LEED projects produced. It's a matter of marking with cheap words fulfilled with a wish and a promise.
As for architecture moving into a "collection"; this is a road that has been traveled before with various "architecture and fashion/other design medium" exhibitions, monographs and lectures that haven't really exposed any new discoveries or answered any questions. Buildings take far too long to design and construct, nevermind the expense OR the quantity of people that are involved in the process, to be "fashionable" in the immediate sense of change and progress. I use Zaha as a clear example of someone who was been working for a considerable amount of time as a designer, but is only just now amassing a quantity of built work with which to evaluate, not due to want or will. The Disney Concert Hall should have been Gehry's great experiment, but that honor ended up being bestowed to Bilbao. Architecture just has far too many factors beyond itself to be the medium of progress it would like to think it is. Clothing can be "reinvented" every 2 weeks because the production time is short, the people involved are minimal, and the production costs are far offset by the retail. Sure, BIM has been promoted as the means to reduce inefficiency, speed production and make Architecture a more responsive medium, but I think we have a long way to go and I have my doubts that a software platform can be the saving grace of the profession.
All of which has derailed your original topic...
I would say if what you have been doing has been working (to some degree) than keep on keeping on. It would seem like an offices in the realm of HOK might respond more to a portfolio that isn't as a singularly focused as your current model, but instead demonstrated a breadth of design work in several disciplines, unless of course you are vying for a position solely doing product design/furniture. If you are getting responses, than obviously you are generating some degree of interest, although I hope said communication is coming from an actual human and not an automation.
My next comment than is that if this idea of collections, i.e. seriality is an interest of yours, then it seems like you really divest in a more rigorous study (or demonstrate that you have). Rather than just pumping out a new, disassociated set of furniture and product design models every 3 months, use something like the any publications as a precedence- devoting each publication to a singular issue. Make a reason to care that a new portfolio is being made, sent and received 4 times a year other than for the sheer act of making something, otherwise your audience is going to get real bored, real quick. I think this might also help you to place your work within some context, even if that dialog is not made explicit. I do think the complete lack of text is not helping you any. I get that images are universal, but without framing this with even a mono-syllabic title you leave your audience to question (as you have seen) the purpose of this document.
Finally, I have to ask- why bother soliciting feedback if you have already developed a process and a working method that is producing results you are apparently satisfied with? I again question the level of self-editing and discretion but than again I have been reading a lot of postmodern fiction so maybe I'm just in that mindset.
need to tdivest
as in, I really NEED TO proofread my archinect diatribes.
@steelstuds -
If 'brick wall' is credited to your name in the permanent collection at the MoMA, the you've got yourself a deal and your cheque is in the mail.
@iheartbooks -
Yes I only saw a few diagrams, but conversely, that's all you showed in your portfolio, which is generally a rather standalone document. Your soft wall diagrams are nearly identical to the ones they have in their catalogues, the name is the same, and your rendered seating is identical to theirs as well. If you credited them elsewhere I apologize, but surely you can see where I'm coming from. I'd assume you'd want credit if someone was to publicly use your own work? They probably would want the same.
I'm not trying to be mean, I simply wanted to bring attention to what I see as a very important point - clearly making references to ideas that are not your own. I personally don't think that's such a dickhead concept, but call me crazy (or a dickhead if you wish).
clearly you've never worked in an architecture office nor have you taken an architecture studio in an architecture program.
Architects, other than soft services, sell one thing-- near accurate to 1/10th of an inch detailed descriptions in the form of drawings. Are long ramble-filled paragraphs about inspiration, proposed circulation and usage ideals accurate descriptions?
wrong - we sell ideas (solutions to particular problems) and our ability to execute said ideas architecturally.
if you are going for the latter, you are selling your technical competence, and quite frankly, this current offering is amateur at best. Most people just starting out tend to focus on the former (which includes sexy rendering skills and overly descriptive nonsense) because only through experience do we learn how to execute design.
both aspects of the profession rely very heavily on our ability to communicate* to the client and the contractor, and if I look at your portfolio and have no clue what is going on, you've failed at convincing me, your audience, your ability to contribute in an architecture firm.
listen to cherith - if you are pursuing some kind of rigor in your ikea-esque furniture study, you need to show just that - rigor... I mentioned before that your two or three photo-shopped renderings of GSD facilities held far more interest than the entire content of this portfolio simply because I could understand the premise behind them.
*good communication does not need to be entirely verbal, but it needs to follow some kind of understandable narrative. diagrams are particularly useful if you are going "universal."
Haha.
so... did I meet your expectations?
I'm actually trying to be helpful. I think you have talent as a provocateur - there has to be some way to work that to your advantage without constantly pissing people off or slinging verbal feces at them the moment they extend a hand. you also have good photoshop skills and apparently strong internet search/research skills based on the amount of unique hot pornographic action you post around here.
or if you are truly Abulafia, then I'll meet you at the louvre at midnight.
i am really only interested in the fact that no one reacted to the article that was posted. arguing over the "portfolio" is like polishing the deck chairs on the titanic on its way down. it's nice to see some hard data about the layoffs though. Mr. Baker at least recognizes the problem more than the AIA does. if this is for another thread i apologize. but since fixing THAT is the only way a portfolio will even make any difference, i don't think it is....
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.