20-25? Good Lord. What are you already 70?

Rem, seriously man, we know youve built 25 projects worthy of a portfolio, but why are you going back to school now man?

well, oma was getting a little boring and i thought....wait a minute! lol. I dont mean a professional portfolio. and by works, i dont mean buildings. you know, drawings, paintings, etc. those sorts of things. I'm more worried that my portfolio would be too short.

8-10 is good number, and I think 12 is a bit too much. You have to understand that the admission people have to go thru hundreds of applications and portfolios.
BTW, I hope you meant "projects" when you said "pieces."

i am going to apply for a 3 year program because i dont have an arch degree. so i dont have any actual architectural 'projects'. i have drawings, paintings, and architectural models, among other things, though.

those are great. another thing people like to look at or want to see is the progression throughout your work-that you actually thought critically about what you were doing. I also wouldn't include a ton of text because the admission committee won't be able to read it all.

mjh, what do you mean by progression of the work? do you mean the actual process that i went through for each piece or how each successive work shows how i learned and grew from the previous one? in fact, should I organize the portfolio into chronological order? how about according to the type of work (all drawings together, all models together, etc)?

Process within one project. If you look at the portfolio requirements for different schools (which you should definitely do) you will see that most of them say quite explicitly "we do not want to see a progression of work/ability, choose only the best works." Therefore, I would stay away from a chronological set up as it might give the idea that you are showing your work as a progression.

A progression of ability is not what mjh00c meant (at least I don't think so.) It can be very important to show your working process - the progression from thought to finished work - in one or more projects. For instance, if you have a series of thumbnail sketches that you did before a final drawing, or you have a few different iterations of a model that you did before the final piece - this can all be very helpful in seeing how you get from point A to point B.

I wouldn't recommend organizing work chronologically - especially work that is unrelated to an undergrad architecture curriculum. Grouping work by type would be the most typical way to do it. Grouping work by theme/idea is another possibility...

Do check the schools' admissions requirements as to the number and size of pages allowed. If you're applying to a school that limits portfolios to 12 letter-sized pages then you probably aren't going to want to present 25 projects.

well, i can to the progression thing for my model (sketches to final model) but i really cant do the same for my other things. i mean, how do i show a progression for my photographs, or drawings and paintings? (i dont do sketches or drafts for my drawings/paintings)

If you have more art pieces in your portfolio than design, make sure you have at least one gesture drawing in your portfolio, very very very important for the portfolio. a good gesture drawing can really show your drawing skills.14 or 15 pieces should be fine.

whats a gesture drawing?

also, how should i organize my works? should i put them according to type (all drawings together, all paintings together, etc), or put them in random order, or something else? what did you guys do? what do admissions people look for?

I think they look for a portfolio that makes it look as though the applicant had confidence in the portfolio making process. I started thinking about my portfolio a few months ago, and I came to Archinect with all my questions. I got the same response more than any other...effectively, "figure it out yourself, the portfolio is an expression of you, there is no correct way to make a portfolio." Of course, this seems to be the least helpful answer, which is ironic because it the most truthful, and thus, the most helpful in the long run. Did that make sense?

Anyway, I started rolling with my portfolio when I stopped asking questions, just started plopping images down on InDesign and started thinking about how things go together. It's like getting a DIY project and then having your friend explain to you how to put it together. "Well when I did mine, I connected piece C with socket H5 and then piece R2 to piecehead B32Ft, but you might want to start with piece R2..." You might find that it's easier to just sit down with the pieces and try stuff until it fits.

How's THAT for a boring analogy? uhh...you see what I'm trying to say though right? Actually, most likely you are still just looking for an answer. I am putting drawings together, arch projects together, etc...

Crap analogy (:P), but what you say is true. I've found it best to create something rough, then iterate towards something that I'm happy with.

One useful practice is to have somebody whose opinion you trust look through the portfolio while you're sat next to them. If you've included some pieces which you're not very confident in, you'll probably find yourself cringing and trying to offer justification. This is a sure sign that things need trimming down.
Additionally, this method a good way to judge the amount of text. After showing your work to a few people, the same questions about a particular piece might come up - the answers might need to be included in your text, or made more obvious by subtraction of other information. You can also observe readers skipping over your carefully constructed paragrahs or favourite works towards the end of the portfolio, which is reality.

Good luck, and get cracking!

i didnt think portfolio's needed text, with the exception of some sort of introduction and a caption describing each piece (ie size, format, date, etc)

I thiink the general consensus has been that text will not be read and should be included as a design element if included at all. I am including blocks of text because I feel that it works into the design of the portfolio and offsets the images. Also, unless you have only freehand drawings or 'art for art's sake' type pieces, you might want to tell a story about how your arch/sculpture/etc. projects came to be. Perhaps the committee won't read it but at least they'll know that you had something to say about your pieces. That's my take on it anyway. Just don't make up a lot of bullshit, because I imagine it'd be a big turnoff if they actually were intrigued, read bits of your text, and realized that you were just writing filler.

Don't tell too much in the way of an explanation, let the interviewer ask the questions to your face. Unless of course there is no depth to your work in which case preparing the text will help.

Hey! What are you trying to say!

Aye citizen, that's probably all you need. Probably not even a date.

BOTS - many M.Arch programs have no interviews as part of their admissions process. And even at schools that do have interviews there are usually numerous portfolio reviews without the candidate present.

I agree that long blocks of text may not be read - at least not by the whole committee and/or not in depth.

However, I'd strongly advise including:
a title for each piece or each project
the course/studio, semester, and faculty that the work was done for - if applicable
the size and media of the work - particularly in the case of painting, sculpture, and large drawings
a two-sentence summary of the project - this is possibly not necessary for something like a painting, but for an architecture studio project it is a must

In some cases schools will specify what type of information should accompany each piece or each page. In that case follow the guidelines precisely.

Admissions people are likely to look at images first, and possibly text not at all. However, there are lots of times that I've looked at an applicant's portfolio and thought "what is this?" or "how does this go with the rest of the project on this page" or even "is this freshman work?" A few captions go a long way toward answering a lot of important questions.

aluminate, what about photographs? i have some photographs taken with a digital camera. i cant really give them the sizes of them (since they can be any size). also, how about things done outside of school? I have some works that i did for fun/on my own time that werent in any kind of gallery/show/etc.

should i also include things like type of camera/post processing ?

That's exactly why I said "if applicable."
For an architecture-school or art-school type of project that was produced in response to an assignment it is typical to list the information I mentioned, though some people disagree as to whether listing professors matters much.
But if you're including things that weren't done for school then you're probably not going to have the same sort of info.
I'd still recommend a title and a mention of the medium/media involved.

As far as type of camera, processing, etc: I've seen this sort of info included sometimes, but it is up to you as to whether you feel it is important/noteworthy in your case, as it applies to your work... Including it or not including it would be ok.

I agree that the size of a digital photo would usually be irrelevant. When I mentioned size I was thinking about paintings, sculpture, architectural models - the reason being that if you have something that is somewhat scale-dependant - such as a life-size figure drawing - then you may want the viewer to know that the original drawing is 9'-0" square as opposed to 9".

thanks for the quick response. this is a kind of follow-up (also open for anyone else who can answer): do admins in general (i know i cant say all schools) care if any of the works were done outside of a class or weren't in some gallery/display? Its just that even though i'll be adding some pieces that i did in undergrad, i have a bunch that i did (multiple medium) after i graduated just for fun that i kept around in my house. do admins see those kinds of works less favorably at all, or am i just being paranoid?

ps- sorry for all the annoying questions, im starting to lay out my portfolio and all these questions started popping into my head.

i strongly believe that the making of the portfolio should be treated as a design challenge, thus, it is not unappropriate to think about the kind of statement you want to make with this object that has an outer core with binding, a cover and then a softer innerside with flexible pages that you flip through... how does that inside permeate to the outside? or does it?

if you have a lot of pieces and not so much for more developed projects that have several iterations, etc... you may want to think of designing a table of contents page but don't do it in a boring, traditional way... unless you want to tell them that you are boring traditional person... think about the table of contents and how that in itself is a design issues... you have things here you are exposing briefly and you are also creating a map for the inners of the book.. so here you have an opportunity to guide one through those inners... take advantage of it and have fun... but be clear... clarity is so important!

also, about having lots of pieces, if you think you explored something in particular in several of the pieces, you may want to bunch these together... but if it becomes too redundant do edit... i had a portfolio for grad school that had 4 projects but they were of my undergrad work that was also in architecture, so these were projects that had developed themes, so there were several representations for each project...

if you know that certain things inspired your work (a painting or a sculpture) and these were things from the world out there you could show these in smaller images, like little thumbs so that you create a narrative for the work, you place in a context that may not be readable from the work itself...

i think that the committee looks for a person that understands that design can exist in anything, and is having fun diving into that process of making and designing, in this case making and designing the portfolio...

and, most of all, don't be afraid to experiment with everything but don't go over the top to make the product so overwhelming and confused like you have lost touch with what you started to do... unless you want them to understand that you are someone who does that: gets carried away.

good luck...

At least a third of the people applying for admission to most first-professional M.Arch programs have no architecture, design, or art degree or major. Many are from backgrounds in which they could hardly be expected to have work that was done for an organized curriculum and/or for any sort of formal show.
People reviewing portfolios usually have access to the rest of your info - usually there is a folder in which there will be a summary of your previous studies, test scores, etc. So they'll often be familiar with your background to some degree. If you had an undergrad major or degree in architecture or studio art and did not have any work that came from that curriculum this might strike someone as odd.
But having outside work - done for your own investigations and for no formal showing or to fulfill an assignment or satisfy a client - is expected and there is no bias against this. Generally it is helpful to have a wide variety of work. Work that was done "on your own" is evidence that you tend to work in a visual/sculptural/representational manner to work out your ideas. This is a good thing to convey.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that work would have had to be in a gallery or display. I didn't mean to convey that idea.

anza- thanks for the tip. i wasnt even thinking of the table of contents but i'll take that into consideration. i dont plan on putting that many pieces in (probably around 18-20) and am currently working on layouts. and i'm definitely experimenting with it.

aluminate- i feel much better about including my outside work now that you've calmed my fears. i dont know where i got that idea either (it certainly wasnt from you). i guess i read some posts where people were talking about putting architectural projects and it scared me, but i dont think that would really apply in my case. i am applying for the 3 year program (i majored in neuroscience, go fig on my paranoia :D). however, i did minor in architecture and took freehand drawing and painting courses, which i will be including in my portfolio. i also took an architecture drawing class but the work i did in there was so elementary (perspective of a generic cubic house, that sort of thing) that i felt it would hurt my portfolio, and i think admin would understand that as well.