looks nice. you should explain your role in the work done in offices. since the quality of work is not consistent it is hard to guess if the quality of the projects (or lack thereof) is because of you or because you were just working for a commercial office and not a design led firm and didn't have any say in the matter.

the mecanoo project is much better than the commercial stuff that follows. if it were me i would take the commercial stuff out (or the starchitect stuff out) depending on where you want to work.

i have my own biases, but having both kinds of work in the portfolio i kinda got the impression the real you is not as good as the best work in the portfolio. the final works caused me to rethink, which was nice.

which sort of underlines the point. what message do you want to convey? starchitect edgy experimenter or workmanlike professional? i think you can go either way based on whats there so far, but i don't think you should show both in one book.

good luck.

i think this work is quite nice. the built work is as seductive as the plastic images that precede it. i would be interested in seeing fewer images though. it seems a bit busy. i would like to see a full spread of one of those details rather than the 12 images. i know its hard to take out stuff that is just as sexy however at this point in ur career, ur cv is probably solid enough to take out all the things you can do and slim down to the things you "like".

great stuff though. keep trucking.

jump, thanks very much. i hear you completely about the confusing mix of two worlds. i´m thinking of having two versions, one for the design-driven office, where i want to end up, another for the commercial office where i´ll probably end up just to get a job, hopefully short term. i was thinking of leaving in some of the later 3D formal investigation even in the commercial version simply to show that i have some ability with current software. and yes, i´ll explain a bit about my roles. again, thank you.

spacefraud, good words too thanks. i understand that i need to edit it down a bit. this is the first time that i´ve considered creating a digital portfolio and these images taken straight from my printed version, in any case i agree that i could be more selective with both photos and drawings. good point about leaving in that which i LIKE, will take that to heart.

it´s great to get a little feedback as it´s been many years since i´ve asked for opinions on my book. although offices are complimentary, i´d like to know what they´re really thinking and what´s keeping them from calling back.

many thanks to you both.

I have no constructive comments about the caliber of your work other than most of looks well-drawn and professional. I simply do not know enough about architecture to say if the content of the images is actually okay.

The portfolio itself could use a little work. You do have an eye for design overall-- your font and color choices in the layout are great.

The image layout on some pages is good, on some pages bad. I do like the concise nature of your presentations. However, I'd like to see some of them stretched to two pages instead of one. It is hard to see what I am even looking out. The collages are hit or miss.

Other than that, I couldn't really tell you how to organize each page better... I could only show you how I would lay it out.

tarnished..
thank you. indeed, this comes straight from my print version which is set up to be seen 1 page at a time. when i now have a spread with two sheets in the digital version, i agree that this changes the composition completely. i´ll take a pass at recomposing. some of the sheets were thrown together with little available graphic content and very quickly just to represent some stage of work, these sheets may not remain part of the finished book.

Double-page spreads are not something you can really pull off in a portfolio anyways. You've got to do a lot of tricky dicky stuff for that to work out.

But whether read as a book (open on table, double-sided), a stack of papers (looking at one page at a time) or on screen (numerous configurations), there's still a hierarchy.

Reading any article (as a section or subsection of a larger work), there's three parts to it: the primary statement(headline, lead photo), the story (the article, other photos, illustrations) and referential content (credits, pull quotes, data charts, photo captions).

Compiling any informational work and most artistic work requires these. Even across multiple pages, you can link the singular article and present a more dynamic story.