I'm really impressed with this one. Big fan of simple layouts. Nice, clean, crisp presentation. Keep posting updated versions, would love to track this one through the end. Is this for school/work, or just a the beginnings of a comprehensive catalogue?

looks very clear. It seems to build up some good momentum towards the end

it's graphically just beautiful. I assume this is school work...?

I think it has the right balance of graphic eye candy that is not only beautiful but also descriptive (so important!! every image in a portfolio should tell a story, not just look pretty!!), and brief narratives to provide context.

Your artistic "eye" is obvious from the images you chose, the composition of the layouts, as well as the composition of your designs. What isn't obvious is your ability or talent for architectural design. But that is a result of the types of projects that are currently in your portfolio. Maybe you have a wider range of projects? I am curious to see how you present a more "traditional" type of project that is focused more on the program and functionality and scale of the space(s) you are creating, rather than the pure geometry derived from a theoretical algothythm or a biological metaphor.

But the portfolio style and content should vary depending on the audience. If you are using it for a traditional job interview, while it will "wow", it may not get you the job. If using it for grad school, it is perfectly appropriate. So just remembr your audience and be able to adjust it on an as-needed basis.

it'd be nice to see more work! it's quite interesting how simplistic your layout is, considering your formally complex projects

WOW, that's a beautiful folio!!!! 

I'm definitively  borrowing ideas from it... I'm also working on mine too :)   

Thanks for sharing.

nicely put together portfolio. 

it would be nice to see a bit of the process behind the projects.  the ideas that drive the work are quite cool but hard to tell if they are the result of an afternoon of design plus some photoshop or if you spent months working out the concept and the result is actually something you had to struggle to resolve.  because of that the work feels a bit like a series of one-liners, or exercises in graphic design.  a bit more information to cover that gap would make the portfolio stronger, at least for me.

Thanks for all the input! The lack of traditional projects was really due to the nature of my school's program (UCLA undergrad). We're taught the fun and interesting aspects of design, but comparatively few technicalities. The discussions during our crits rarely focused on functionality unless it was obvious that someone made a mistake in their design. The closest thing to a project based more on program and function is a house that I'm still re-drawing.

Yarchiect, this portfolio was really meant more for grad school applications than job interviews. For job applications, I'd wait to finish that house project and add more detailed drawings to it.

jump, I agree that the portfolio seems lacking in process. I had been trying to keep each project concise, which meant having to choose between descriptive and concept drawings. Perhaps an additional spread per project with nothing but diagrams?

if its for school then i would include more of the progress just to show that there is some deeper thinking going on.

the disconnect with tradition is not a big deal in my opinion, but it is hard to see that you have any thoughts yourself about the work you are doing.  I am sure you have put lots of effort into the projects but they come across a bit as assignments that you did just to do the work rather than to follow some kind of idea that you have about architecture - its role in society, ways to tackle issues through design, or whatever.  simply looking at the projects i wonder what direction would your work take from now on? is it pure design (form making ) or something about inhabitation or function, program, or all of the above?  somehow i feel like that direction to the work should be more clear

it all looks good though, so maybe none of the above matters ;-)

jump, I think some of the questions you asked might be more clearly answered in a personal statement than in my portfolio, especially the questions about the direction of my work. I'm wondering if the lack of process you see has anything to do with the scarcity of model photos, including iterative models (most of which have been quite un-photogenic). To me, physical models convey a sense of having attempted to manifest a design, even just as a representation, which accounts for more variables (and therefore involve more thought) than a digital rendering would, which really is a relatively quick and easy way to produce.

yes that could be.  i find the work a bit generic as beautifully rendered as it all is.  can't tell from the work if you have any interests that the professors didn't ask you to pursue, if you get my meaning?  i can see that its architecture, but am not getting any idea why the shapes are what they are, beyond whimsy and some kind of mandate to use the tools you did. 

don't get me wrong, i like the computer generated stuff.  but when it is used just to make beautiful shapes i am not sure its any different than composing boxes.  that is just my thing though.  lot's of people don't ask the why of architecture.  still, for grad school i do think there should be some evidence that the archtiecture is an exploration of some kind of question and i dont really see it so much in the finished work.  hence the desire to see process and not just the product.

but like i say, that is just my thing and should be taken with a grain of salt.