i think you have a good set of images and drawings to work with. i just think it's in need of some tightening. each spread seems unique. could be better if there is a rhythm of 3 or so different spread layout 'types'.
Your "Initial Vision" sketch for the chapel seems a little after-the-fact, like you drew it latter out of a need to have an "Initial Vision" sketch. I would add more detail and give it a different title.
Detail on Pg. 13 seems nice. It's a shame it's so small. Could work for you as the money shot on that page with a little sun/shade and enlargement.
Section on pg. 21 needs labeling
Surface project seems incomplete. I would finish it or remove it.
Pg. 36 process drawings are GREAT. Why are you hiding these in the back???
- the text treatment is awful. The line length is inconsistent as is the decision to justify or right align. Clearly there is no grid system that is helping to give these text boxes any regularity. Page 18 is a clear example- why is the line length so short? It's impossible to read because there are maybe 2 or 3 words per line.
- the title boxes really bug me. they just seem sloppy. left alignment on the text is almost outside of the box, which in most cases is way larger than it needs to be. aligning the text at the top feels clumsy and awkward- would be better to just align the text on the bottom instead. might consider making titles all caps so they read a little stronger. it's the only thing on the page, which makes it all the more critical that it's composed well, which doesn't mean over-design it.
- have you considered binding? a lot of text is way too close to the inside margin and is going to get lost once you bind this thing. again, you really need to establish a grid and make sure that includes setting safe for text zones away from page edges and margins.
- i feel like part of the problem with this, is that it's too safe. the type is all set in some non-offensive san-serif, the images are all confined within boxes and nothing ever fills an entire page. same goes for the text which is all small and humble, not asking for a lot of attention. sure, it fulfills the requirements for a portfolio as it demonstrates a range of skills and projects and if you are applying to an unknown state school than this is probably great. otherwise, i would try to make this a little more attention getting: full-bleed some images, change up the scale of the other images so they don't all fit within the same size, same location. there are tons of examples on here of decent portfolios to "borrow" inspiration from.
Some of your drawings are too small as they appear on the page. Some of the model photography is too big. You seem to be really proud of your model making skills. I find your drawings to be more interesting (such as Initial vision ones). Make such drawings bigger.
I agree that Surface project looks incomplete.
While most of the pages look fine, overall effect is a mish-mash of styles. It felt like a book form late '70 at some point. Then it felt like a '90 book etc...
I like the idea of a mostly empty page with just a simple sketch on it (mostly like p. 12, sort of like p. 19, though I prefer the sketch on 12 better myself).
But Cheri is right, the text seems to be in different locations on every page, and on pages with multiple images the different pictures just seem to be arranged by whatever size they happen to be when you drew, photographed, or rendered them.
I feel the text and images should be made to fit some sort of pattern, and a similar pattern should be used for each page (or 2 page spread). You really need to look at making some kind of overall grid to use, and then place your images or text within that grid.
But I do like what you've done with pages 18-19, if you could maybe 4 pages per project, and use these 2 pages as the example for the first two pages of every project as a "teaser" or introduction, and then follow up with two more pages for the same project going into more detail.
Hi guys,
Thanks for all the great feedback.
Seems like the general consensus is that the layout needs to be reworked.
dot: I agree with the pg 6-7 assessment. Will redo for sure.
PencilPusher: the Initial Vision sketch actually was my first sketch for the project. Everything was based off of that, so I guess I can see why you'd say that. Definitely will complete the surface project before sending this out, thanks for noticing it's incompleteness. The process sketches should go where if not in the back? One of my professors writing me a letter of rec thinks they should go in the front. Not sure about that one.
Cherith: First, awesome name. You seem to really hate the layout. I'm not huge on it either, so I understand. I will try to rework the whole thing so it's not "too safe." I know I need a better grid. Overall awesome feedback. Thanks.
steelstuds: I think the model photos maybe read differently in person, but I'll definitely think about this one. 70's book...lol
Milwaukee: Pattern for layout, I guess is the gist. Need to rework the grid.
Thanks for the feedback everybody!
Oct 26, 10 3:55 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 Crit
A link to a draft of my portfolio, for application to graduate schools this fall.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!
http://issuu.com/jbhorne/docs/joshua_horne_portfolio
Thanks
i think you have a good set of images and drawings to work with. i just think it's in need of some tightening. each spread seems unique. could be better if there is a rhythm of 3 or so different spread layout 'types'.
spread 6-7 s kind of weird.
Your "Initial Vision" sketch for the chapel seems a little after-the-fact, like you drew it latter out of a need to have an "Initial Vision" sketch. I would add more detail and give it a different title.
Detail on Pg. 13 seems nice. It's a shame it's so small. Could work for you as the money shot on that page with a little sun/shade and enlargement.
Section on pg. 21 needs labeling
Surface project seems incomplete. I would finish it or remove it.
Pg. 36 process drawings are GREAT. Why are you hiding these in the back???
short review: good work, horrible layout
- the text treatment is awful. The line length is inconsistent as is the decision to justify or right align. Clearly there is no grid system that is helping to give these text boxes any regularity. Page 18 is a clear example- why is the line length so short? It's impossible to read because there are maybe 2 or 3 words per line.
- the title boxes really bug me. they just seem sloppy. left alignment on the text is almost outside of the box, which in most cases is way larger than it needs to be. aligning the text at the top feels clumsy and awkward- would be better to just align the text on the bottom instead. might consider making titles all caps so they read a little stronger. it's the only thing on the page, which makes it all the more critical that it's composed well, which doesn't mean over-design it.
- have you considered binding? a lot of text is way too close to the inside margin and is going to get lost once you bind this thing. again, you really need to establish a grid and make sure that includes setting safe for text zones away from page edges and margins.
- i feel like part of the problem with this, is that it's too safe. the type is all set in some non-offensive san-serif, the images are all confined within boxes and nothing ever fills an entire page. same goes for the text which is all small and humble, not asking for a lot of attention. sure, it fulfills the requirements for a portfolio as it demonstrates a range of skills and projects and if you are applying to an unknown state school than this is probably great. otherwise, i would try to make this a little more attention getting: full-bleed some images, change up the scale of the other images so they don't all fit within the same size, same location. there are tons of examples on here of decent portfolios to "borrow" inspiration from.
Some of your drawings are too small as they appear on the page. Some of the model photography is too big. You seem to be really proud of your model making skills. I find your drawings to be more interesting (such as Initial vision ones). Make such drawings bigger.
I agree that Surface project looks incomplete.
While most of the pages look fine, overall effect is a mish-mash of styles. It felt like a book form late '70 at some point. Then it felt like a '90 book etc...
I like the idea of a mostly empty page with just a simple sketch on it (mostly like p. 12, sort of like p. 19, though I prefer the sketch on 12 better myself).
But Cheri is right, the text seems to be in different locations on every page, and on pages with multiple images the different pictures just seem to be arranged by whatever size they happen to be when you drew, photographed, or rendered them.
I feel the text and images should be made to fit some sort of pattern, and a similar pattern should be used for each page (or 2 page spread). You really need to look at making some kind of overall grid to use, and then place your images or text within that grid.
But I do like what you've done with pages 18-19, if you could maybe 4 pages per project, and use these 2 pages as the example for the first two pages of every project as a "teaser" or introduction, and then follow up with two more pages for the same project going into more detail.
Hi guys,
Thanks for all the great feedback.
Seems like the general consensus is that the layout needs to be reworked.
dot: I agree with the pg 6-7 assessment. Will redo for sure.
PencilPusher: the Initial Vision sketch actually was my first sketch for the project. Everything was based off of that, so I guess I can see why you'd say that. Definitely will complete the surface project before sending this out, thanks for noticing it's incompleteness. The process sketches should go where if not in the back? One of my professors writing me a letter of rec thinks they should go in the front. Not sure about that one.
Cherith: First, awesome name. You seem to really hate the layout. I'm not huge on it either, so I understand. I will try to rework the whole thing so it's not "too safe." I know I need a better grid. Overall awesome feedback. Thanks.
steelstuds: I think the model photos maybe read differently in person, but I'll definitely think about this one. 70's book...lol
Milwaukee: Pattern for layout, I guess is the gist. Need to rework the grid.
Thanks for the feedback everybody!
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.