I am new here, but I was wondering if I could get some feedback on my portfolio for which I will be applying to graduate school for fall 2006. I am currently an undergraduate at the university of illinois @ chicago. So far, I am applying to tu delft, columbia, ucla, + cca. My portfolio is near a finished state, but I was hoping to get some feedback before its completion. Also, for people who have applied to any of these schools: What do you think are my chances for getting in?
I am a bit worried about its length, as it seems to be a bit long. Also, I was wondering if I should include a project that I did for work. I included it only because I was a very large part of it (design, dwgs, shops, fabrication, installation).
I am not at school at any of the places you are applying to; however, keep in mind that the reviewing committee will look at tons of portfolios...they really don't have time to read every little thing, but everything looks good. It is obvious that you can design. Good luck.
Eh. So-so. Not bad, I guess. (Kidding, of course, Gelander. And I think I still owe you a beer when I get back to Chi).
(Dubious list of schools, but that's another conversation)
I'll be critical. Because I can.
My thoughts, sir:
Boathouse came out nice. I would urge towards less descriptive text on the first page of that (and every subsequent) project. It won't be read.
Page 2 of Lake Villa is by far the most interesting page, in my mind.
Boatrack is only mildly interesting, perhaps that and its "built couple" in the Print Room enclosure should be pushed more towards the rear of the portfolio, maybe before Penumbra?
First page of BioPlore is too much text for my taste. It sounds silly, but take a look at the diagrammatic pages of Cheyne's portfolio... they read more as a composition which happen to be engrained with really great information, not as charts and graphs meant to be read and interpolated. There are elements of that in your page (the lower half), but they need to take charge of the composition.
I have to be honest, I don't like page 2 of the UrbHab stuff. The top right image emphasizes everything that they brought up during the final crit: The buildings are a straight extrusion of a diagram. The model is good, and the rest of that page is pretty good, but maybe find another view that doesn't emphasize the flatness of those facades?
Finally, I think I'd flip the Penumbra pages... study models and renderings first, final images second. Also, the big image of the completed piece is a little plain. If you need a bigger photo of the piece from right before the Year End Show, let me know, and I'll dig. Whats there is very flat, the power outlets are distracting, and there is absolutely no play of light and shadow (which, from what I remember, was mildly important to the project).
All that said, I of course think that you have a great body of work and will have no problem getting in to great schools. I'm truly impressed, but still, I wanted to give you a critical rundown.
Showed some other people in my studio, they too are quite impressed. Why don't you join us here? Why only apply to UCLA and CCA?
your critical rundown is, as always, greatly appreciated and welcomed. I would have to say that I agree with all the comments that you made.
Do you still think that I am crazy for my pursuit of the boathouse? It was my first love and I had to give it a second chance.
As for the urb page, I would have to agree also. I was having a little trouble deciding what to do there and somewhat decided to put it aside to look at later.
penumbra is what probably needs the most help right now. I am missing the final autocad construction documents, most likely due to my flash drive crashing on martina's computer during finals week. Anyways, if you have some photos or the const. doc's that you would like to share, you know that I would appreciate it.
As for schools: I'd like to continue another conversation with you on a private level.
always a pleasure to hear from you maj.
best in all regards,
gse
ps. sorry about that night Steph and I called you with the voice changer. We were both pretty loaded on margaritas.
Very nice work, a bit too Deanriesque maybe, but that's okay since you're still a student. I think the only way to become a designer is to start by getting perfect at copying your master. Just like in the Renaissance. Your work is very professional from my point of view. I'm sure this portfolio should be accepted anywhere, but the rules of selection in the US seem more and more complex...And there's the money issue too.
Good luck anyway.
Ok,
Nice stuff, By far the best portfolio I've seen in Archinect.
BUT I think that the comment above a bit "denariesque" is because you are not giving us context to the projects. Without Process/context we can only think of similarities with starchitects of our day. What I mean is that nothing in your process tells me that you got to where you got by a set of interesting rules that you followed, and ended up with a form.
Your projects seem to have a formalist idea first, no process, no sweat and tears. A little bit of denari/ a bit of FOA, a bit of MVRDV, Diller Scoffidio, asymptote, etc.... oila!
Im not saying you did that, you just dont give me enough info to think anything else.
Also, I agree that is too much text, and you are highlighting with full page spreads images that quite frankly I wouldnt highlight. You have incredibely beautiful drawings, and you highlight so-so to mediocre renderings.
Sorry if it sounds harsher than it actually is, i did like your portfolio a lot, it is good. But if you ask for opinions I cant help myself even if you are the "competition" ;)
I would tend to agree and disagree with the comment made about the work being "formalist first". Some of the later work, such as the urban habitats project did have a lot of what you were speaking of, but I do realize that some other projects are lacking in that regard. That is one aspect that I am always more and more critical about in my work and I'm glad that you pointed it out.
Thank you for the comment on the text. I am begining to realize now that I do have too much and will thin it out a bit. As Mmatt stated, it probably won't be read.
really nice work. and pretty advanced, i think, for a pre-professional undergrad. if i were you i would look into grad schools that will give you some advanced standing. i'm currently doing the med program at yale, and i know a lot of first year march's who are rather advanced, but are stuck doing all the core courses anyway. maybe it wouldn't bother you...but its worth some consideration...
I feel like I was little strong geland sorry.
But is just that hte work is sooo good, that you dont want people to make facile connections to starchitects. You need to scream this is me, its my thought, my passion.
Quite frankly I think page 6 needs to go WAYYY smaller. your other work, is so nice this one looks ackward.
Instead of having the "Material Study" I would give my design projects a little more room, having each page speak at a different volume, right now they are all screaming a bit too much.
It's exciting to talk about your work becuase it is good to start with. Hopefully Ill see you in Columbia next fall (if we get in).
don't worry about feeling that you expressed your opinion too strongly. That is what I am essentially asking for: a critical review. I thank you for your opinion and insight as I have found it to be valuable.
In response to your comment about each page speaking at a different volume, I would have to agree that this is something that I need to work on. As it exists now, each page is in a similar format to the previous. It seems as though some sort of visual standard is necessary for the whole to be cohesive, yet I think there is still some room for elasticity.
Thank you all for your comments. It is exciting to be able to get a response on my work when it is still in a state where things can be changed or reconsidered.
Hi- Generally I liked the work, and certainly you have some talent............ but i think what some of the comments especially melquiades were about is that the flashiness and modelling of every project suggest a level of refinement to be read with a starchitect, but given the level of experience you have - it looks too much like emulation. Partly that is to do with a lack of context- but i think that what a lot of the models are trying to show is better explained diagramatically. Show the idea that creates, develops and defines a project, rather than a finished 3d model of every stage. Critically what that means is that i think what is lacking from your portfolio is the explanation and presentaion of ideas. And i think it does no harm to explain each project further through less developed means- ie a diagram- and i dont mean napkin sketches- they can be as refined as your portfolio (perhaps think Lindy Roy link">http://www.roydesign.com/]link[/url]
esp NOAH and issey in interiors- which fits well with your graphical style.
I think that would would give a real depth to the portfolio- whilst on the one hand having some great final finished images but more of an explanation of process. But thats all euro thought- maybe what they are looking for is a little different...
and about text- i agree generally they dont look at it- but if they want to- and they well might- just not all the time- it should be there. So just have it small- I presume these are A1's so 9pt should be fine.
I'm not doing you down if thats how it sounds- what i'm saying is you have got further with your work so we can have a better discussion- and i think there needs to be a difference in the presentation of the stage of a project becuase ultimately they are looking for a progression of work and not just a finished piece.
hope this helps
I agree with what others have said, but just to add another bit, what about showing how adept you are in mediums other than the digital, you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well (esp. organic type schools like UCLA). Perhaps adding sketches you've done in your design developement might over come the ubiquity of the computer renderings while also showing the origins of your design sensibilities.
I agree with what others have said, but just to add another bit, what about showing how adept you are in mediums other than the digital, you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well. Perhaps adding sketches you've done in your design developement might over come the ubiquity of the computer renderings while also showing the origins of your design sensibilities.
"you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well (esp. organic type schools like UCLA)"
Have you been to UCLA in the last decade? This portfolio is set up very well for their interests. Could care less about hand drawings.
And as far as doing things by hand at UIC (not U of I, big difference to those of us who are (were) here, not so big to people on the outside), I an attest to Gelander's prolific hand diagram processes, but I don't think they are the least bit necessary here. If the illustrator version reads more clearly, introducing a squiggly line sketch is counter-productive!
That said, I agree with some of the comments about diagrams. Need some more! I know you have them, man. What about those block-by-block diagrams of UrbHab? Those were hot.
Sure the above comments may be true, but I think the portfolio looks above and beyond what schools are looking for for MArch I programs. I believe this because at UCLA we are able to llok at the portfolios of the incoming students at any time. They can be pretty bad...
'Have you been to UCLA in the last decade? This portfolio is set up very well for their interests. Could care less about hand drawings'
ok. there was a portfolio posted here a while ago from a student from UCLA and it had hand drawings in it so my impression was that they emphasized analog drawing skill as well as digital.
But I'm curious, you didn't do any decent projects in anything other than computer? Did they teach CAD right off the bat?
And surely your design developement process involved more than just diagramming.
I really dig your penumbral contraption on the last page. Could you have an overall concept of the portfolio that ties all the projects together instead of the typical portfolio? But hey, what do I know I am just a 5th-year BArchy.
I agree with domstic, can you draw? Maybe throw in some concept sketches.
Anyways your Max skills are impresive.
"But I'm curious, you didn't do any decent projects in anything other than computer? Did they teach CAD right off the bat?"
They didn't teach CAD at all (beyond L is for line), those of us who learned 3d modelling learned it ourselves within studio projects.
"ok. there was a portfolio posted here a while ago from a student from UCLA and it had hand drawings in it so my impression was that they emphasized analog drawing skill as well as digital."
They emphasize design. Who gives a flying fuck if you do a squiggly line drawing? The end product is most important. Anyone who has done any designing whatsoever and worked in 3d knows and understands the sketchbooks filled with squiggles and thoughts and randomness are a means to an end.
Just like a thesis, a portfolio can either be about the process (and thereby would have to be about the process in each and every project) or about the product. This portfolio, in my mind, is not about process. Nor should it be. To compromise somewhere between process and product is to sell short one or the other.
You need to keep your eye on the ball. The intention of a grad portfolio is not to explain a project or to sell its merits. It's to explain your interests and sell your strengths. It's about what you, the student, want and produces, not what the project looked like 6 weeks before the final. Nobody cares.
yes, in fact, I do have the ability to draw/draft/sketch. That is all that I did for the first two years of my degree. I am self taught (with the help of studio friends) as far as my capabilities on the computer. I did not include hand drawings (most relevant to each project would be a rough process sketch in a notebook with coffee spilled to the side of it) because with the way that I work, each sketch is a small step towards the end result. Some sketch that I had done at the beginning of a project may have little bearing on the end, but it was a trial/error or lead me to another idea, etc.. I included the images I did because these are the ways that I represent my ideas + projects. As Mmatt pointed out: these are my strengths and I am trying my best to push those.
Also, another reason why hand drawn images are not present is because most of the "finished" images from projects that were hand drawn were from my first 3 semesters in school and subsequently, they are some of my first and weakest projects.
I am still curious as to what people think about the bulk content of the portfolio: is it too long? Any thoughts as you looked through it?
Also, is it acceptable to include the project that I did for work? Thoughts on this issue also would be appreciated.
I can't do too much critiquing of the portfolio from an architect's perspective, but as a graphic designer, here goes. Also, this isn't meant to be singular to you, as I've noticed similar things in portfolios that people have posted online and also in monographs or magazines.
I just wonder why so many architecture portfolios & books exhibit Horror Vacui. Maybe it's because people cut their teeth on Bruce Mau/Koolhaas books or something?
Every bit of every page is full, full, full of information & illustrations. This tendency could be assuaged by making the portfolio either longer (not in terms of actual content, but in number of pages, so that you can space information out more - so it may get "longer," but will actually be easier to comprehend) or by editing the presented information to be more efficient (editing out projects at your discrection, or showing less information per project).
You have obviously put a lot of care into making the information you've put on each page make sense with each other, but when you look at these pages as wholes - it's a lot of information shocking the eye all at once. Lots of detailed renderings, lots of detailed photos. Nowhere do you ever get a chance to let things 'breathe.'
The breathing room should especially extend to the typography, too. Take slide 18, "Penumbra." The look of this page could be totally improved just by adjusting the type. Leave more of a blank margin around the text. Increase the leading of the type (the space between each line - if you're using 10pt font, try using 13-14pt. leading). And, in this particular instance, I don't believe you need *all* those photos since it doesn't look terribly different from each angle. Maybe one full shot, and one detail. Think about how you see projects presented in design magazines - you don't get a full 360, x-y-x-axis, rendering of every projects, just a few 'glamour shots' of the most significant points of note.
Unless it is a very specific design intention to give the presentation of your work a cramped or "full" feeling to it (i.e. if you were showing a project on urban density or something, and wanted to impart the feeling of crowding to your design), if at all possible you may consider leaving some space around stuff in the future. It doesn't seem like this is intentional in your work, though -more likely you wanted to just show the maximum information in the minimum number of pages, which is not always successful in getting people to understand the gestalt of your work right away.
That said, it *is* obviously careful and well-considered. And - honestly - you've done this much work and other architecture applicants have praised it, so I personally would send the thing on in!
Your portfolio is really strong. I am in the process of putting one together myself and looking at yours makes it hurt just a little. I do, however, agree with Susan Surface a little bit. I looked through your spreads very quickly, didn't read a thing, and didnt attempt to understand the projects at all. Similiar, perhaps, to how admissions faculty may flip through with 500 more sitting in the pile in front of them. Im sure the projects are strong but the one thing I noticed is that all of the pages begin to look the same. Hot digital graphics all with a similiar frequency page after page. It seems like a lot of the comments you have heard already; white space, show diagrams, breathing room could be valuable. Those digital renderings may be a lot more powerful if they are given a chance to stand out more. Just a thought...
I think this port brings up an interesting point of
intuitive process vs generative process...and I think certain schools will be looking for sketches and diagrams while other will focus on other issues.
Lots of good things already said, and I agree it is good already. Always room for critisism and I think it is great you ask for it.
Susan is absolutely correct about the layout. Less is more, agree about the multiple shots that are so similar. I actually like page 6 because it has only one image, and a very strong interesting one at that. I can actually imagine occupying that, the other images I can't. It stands out in your portfolio, while the rest fades and mushes together, if I must critisize. I also agree with the comments about lots of fancy imagery, and wanting a break from that, show me something messy, not just more of the same refined stuff. Consider shortening it?
While I think we are all giving legit crits, I wouldn't fuss over it and try to change it a whole bunch, maybe the paring down is most important and easiest thing you can do.
I guess another way to say it is: leave something to intrigue the viewer, Kinda like how a woman is sexier with lingerie that buck nekked. don't put it all out there and throw it in the the viewer's face for THEM to decide what they want to view on each page they will lose interest and attention will stray - obviously they aren't going to be able to study it to the degree you'd like them too, select your images very carefully.
please post if you update.
I'm also in the process of making mine, which I am now not as confident about.
I have one suggestion for you even though I think that its already great. I've had professors tell me that you need to have a evident design strategy but also be able to stop the reviewer. Its seem to me that it would be easy to become lost in your layout or to easy to just flip through, maybe I'm wrong but thats kinda what I did. It might be that each page contains alot of similar tones which sort of becomes repeditive. There might be a way for you highlight your favorite works which would cause the reviewer to pause and flip a little slower.
And agian I want to say that am impressed and wished my was at that level.
'They emphasize design. Who gives a flying fuck if you do a squiggly line drawing? The end product is most important. Anyone who has done any designing whatsoever and worked in 3d knows and understands the sketchbooks filled with squiggles and thoughts and randomness are a means to an end.'
Semantics my friend. a computer rendering presenting a design and watercolor painting presenting a design presents two different design sensibilities. The end product and the representation of the end product are one in the same - they present the design temperment of the student and depending on the school is also a reflection of the design temperment of the school i.e. Columbia U. you can tell a Columbia student miles away by the renderings. The same for the portfolio, a process portfolio and a product portfolio present two different modes of thought, different sensibilites, and different personalities, equally valid but for different reasons, and thus certain sensibilities appeal to different schools for different reasons. I was wrong about UCLA, i was thinking of UC Berk, a different school, with different sensibility. So i say that yes, some people do care what the project looked like 6 weeks before it was completed because it shows them in a blink of the eye what context you put yourself in, the cache of meanings you surround around yourself with, do you value being an artist or an engineer, or is it somewhere inbetween, or is it something different all together.
I personally like to see the evolution of ideas. The basis for your design is as important as the end product. I do like your portfolio however there are somethings that could be improved.
First thing that bothered me was the color. Everything is grey. Everything looks like they are intended to be made of plastic and manufactured in China. I know its hard to incorporate color into the page but as you scan all the sheets there is just so much grey. I noticed this is a trend. At the Harvard GSD there is tons of this going around. MIT is the same. I am rather unimpressed by the graphics used by many students. I do like your ideas and concepts. I even like the exploded axonmetric. There is no doubt you will get into a grad school. You have the necessary tools needed to suceed. However please find a flavor of your own. I have been working in architecture for over 7 years. The people who turn out to be the best problem solvers are rarely following the pack.
Keep up the good work and try to find your flavor in grad school. Once you are in the industry its a rare but sweet treat to find a firm with similar taste.
Geland your portoflio is good, this thread has turned to something else so my comments are not directly about you or your work.
I am really bothered by the lack of process both in Art and Architecture. If you don't create your own set of rules, and experiment, you are basicaly copying others or materializing facile ideas. In art you see it all the time, one liners all over the place without context or challenge.
I think the jeff koons effect is creeping into architecture, make shocking glossy/images and $ell $ell $ell. Will we see the Ciocciolina "money shot" building?
But I disagree that Columbia or any Unversity is teaching without process, the process in Columbia is digital, but is still process. They are experimenting and coming out with new ways of thinking of space, it takes out he had-made but it still is process. So don't make a blanket statement about Columbia, they are teaching new methods and techniques, some students use them for good, some just copy to stay afloat. I have looked at their work and I find it refreshing.
Geland your work shows thoughtfulness and process, you dont show it. I would love to see the processes that allowed you to arrive to the beautiful spaces in the Chicago building. It is by far the best, and looks like you made many decisions in a very precise manner. How did you make those decisions? You dont have to put a bunch of sketches for the hell ofit, but one or two that explain the spatial concept would be wonderful.
also, remember this is a grad school portfolio not a professional portfolio and the people looking at it probably want to get some idea of what the student is thinking when designing. gehry uses models tocreate form, rem uses program, holl does the intuition/haptic thing. but you might not get that from the finished buildings. same with your work (which is pretty good). so yeah, put the process in if you can work it somehow. it will make the portfolio better.
"I can't do too much critiquing of the portfolio from an architect's perspective, but as a graphic designer, here goes."
I usually find the opinions of non-architects to be the most interesting. If I ask someone that isn't in the field a question, I usually get a similar reply and have not ever understood why. In my opinion, if you are an intelligent and detail-oriented individual, such as yourself, your opinion is still highly valued. I really took the third and fifth paragraphs that you stated into high consideration. Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed response.
Chairman Mao:
Your emphasis on more process was also very helpful and I enjoyed the link that you attached, particularily the documentation of the Issey Miyake project. I can begin to understand why some have interpreted my work as emulation. Although, it is not simply a "I like asymptote, so I think that I will do an asymptote-ish project this semester". I have taken the opportunity to explore different ideas with each project in my undergraduate years @ UIC and I don't think that it is a bad thing at all. I look to the coming years as an opportunity to focus my work.
All: I will be refining the portfolio in the coming week or so and will post an update in this discussion. I hope that I can incorporate as many points and suggestions into it that I have recieved. You all have been very helpful.
I know this is such a throwback 2000s, but the link with the portfolio is not available anymore. While the comments and critique intrigued me, I would surely like to see the portfolio itself so I know what people were talking about ...and maybe have a look at an updated version.
Many thanks!
Nov 23, 18 5:50 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
Is that a serious question?
Nov 23, 18 6:05 am ·
·
randomised
No worries, I found it:
Nov 23, 18 6:54 am ·
·
emmachris
Exactly what I was looking for. But I'm missing pages 19 and 581. I see you guys still keep track of the archives. Can you send those two in a sealed letter? You never know with these horse-mailmen...
graduate school portfolio: critique
Hello,
I am new here, but I was wondering if I could get some feedback on my portfolio for which I will be applying to graduate school for fall 2006. I am currently an undergraduate at the university of illinois @ chicago. So far, I am applying to tu delft, columbia, ucla, + cca. My portfolio is near a finished state, but I was hoping to get some feedback before its completion. Also, for people who have applied to any of these schools: What do you think are my chances for getting in?
I am a bit worried about its length, as it seems to be a bit long. Also, I was wondering if I should include a project that I did for work. I included it only because I was a very large part of it (design, dwgs, shops, fabrication, installation).
Any and all comments are very much appreciated.
portfolio address:
http://geland.smugmug.com
thank you,
gse
I am not at school at any of the places you are applying to; however, keep in mind that the reviewing committee will look at tons of portfolios...they really don't have time to read every little thing, but everything looks good. It is obvious that you can design. Good luck.
Eh. So-so. Not bad, I guess. (Kidding, of course, Gelander. And I think I still owe you a beer when I get back to Chi).
(Dubious list of schools, but that's another conversation)
I'll be critical. Because I can.
My thoughts, sir:
Boathouse came out nice. I would urge towards less descriptive text on the first page of that (and every subsequent) project. It won't be read.
Page 2 of Lake Villa is by far the most interesting page, in my mind.
Boatrack is only mildly interesting, perhaps that and its "built couple" in the Print Room enclosure should be pushed more towards the rear of the portfolio, maybe before Penumbra?
First page of BioPlore is too much text for my taste. It sounds silly, but take a look at the diagrammatic pages of Cheyne's portfolio... they read more as a composition which happen to be engrained with really great information, not as charts and graphs meant to be read and interpolated. There are elements of that in your page (the lower half), but they need to take charge of the composition.
I have to be honest, I don't like page 2 of the UrbHab stuff. The top right image emphasizes everything that they brought up during the final crit: The buildings are a straight extrusion of a diagram. The model is good, and the rest of that page is pretty good, but maybe find another view that doesn't emphasize the flatness of those facades?
Finally, I think I'd flip the Penumbra pages... study models and renderings first, final images second. Also, the big image of the completed piece is a little plain. If you need a bigger photo of the piece from right before the Year End Show, let me know, and I'll dig. Whats there is very flat, the power outlets are distracting, and there is absolutely no play of light and shadow (which, from what I remember, was mildly important to the project).
All that said, I of course think that you have a great body of work and will have no problem getting in to great schools. I'm truly impressed, but still, I wanted to give you a critical rundown.
Showed some other people in my studio, they too are quite impressed. Why don't you join us here? Why only apply to UCLA and CCA?
Take care.
.mm
Hey Geland,
Where did you model / render / edit the "boathouse"?
3ds max?
Thanks!
nappy,
All of the 3d modeling for all of the projects was done with 3dsmax.
gse
mmaj,
your critical rundown is, as always, greatly appreciated and welcomed. I would have to say that I agree with all the comments that you made.
Do you still think that I am crazy for my pursuit of the boathouse? It was my first love and I had to give it a second chance.
As for the urb page, I would have to agree also. I was having a little trouble deciding what to do there and somewhat decided to put it aside to look at later.
penumbra is what probably needs the most help right now. I am missing the final autocad construction documents, most likely due to my flash drive crashing on martina's computer during finals week. Anyways, if you have some photos or the const. doc's that you would like to share, you know that I would appreciate it.
As for schools: I'd like to continue another conversation with you on a private level.
always a pleasure to hear from you maj.
best in all regards,
gse
ps. sorry about that night Steph and I called you with the voice changer. We were both pretty loaded on margaritas.
Very nice work, a bit too Deanriesque maybe, but that's okay since you're still a student. I think the only way to become a designer is to start by getting perfect at copying your master. Just like in the Renaissance. Your work is very professional from my point of view. I'm sure this portfolio should be accepted anywhere, but the rules of selection in the US seem more and more complex...And there's the money issue too.
Good luck anyway.
French I think you mean Denariesque, right?
Ok,
Nice stuff, By far the best portfolio I've seen in Archinect.
BUT I think that the comment above a bit "denariesque" is because you are not giving us context to the projects. Without Process/context we can only think of similarities with starchitects of our day. What I mean is that nothing in your process tells me that you got to where you got by a set of interesting rules that you followed, and ended up with a form.
Your projects seem to have a formalist idea first, no process, no sweat and tears. A little bit of denari/ a bit of FOA, a bit of MVRDV, Diller Scoffidio, asymptote, etc.... oila!
Im not saying you did that, you just dont give me enough info to think anything else.
Also, I agree that is too much text, and you are highlighting with full page spreads images that quite frankly I wouldnt highlight. You have incredibely beautiful drawings, and you highlight so-so to mediocre renderings.
Sorry if it sounds harsher than it actually is, i did like your portfolio a lot, it is good. But if you ask for opinions I cant help myself even if you are the "competition" ;)
Hey. I'm a second year grad student and your stuff looks better than mine. Nice job. I agree though, cut down on the text. They don't read it.
melquiades,
thank you for the comments.
I would tend to agree and disagree with the comment made about the work being "formalist first". Some of the later work, such as the urban habitats project did have a lot of what you were speaking of, but I do realize that some other projects are lacking in that regard. That is one aspect that I am always more and more critical about in my work and I'm glad that you pointed it out.
Thank you for the comment on the text. I am begining to realize now that I do have too much and will thin it out a bit. As Mmatt stated, it probably won't be read.
best,
gse
really nice work. and pretty advanced, i think, for a pre-professional undergrad. if i were you i would look into grad schools that will give you some advanced standing. i'm currently doing the med program at yale, and i know a lot of first year march's who are rather advanced, but are stuck doing all the core courses anyway. maybe it wouldn't bother you...but its worth some consideration...
I feel like I was little strong geland sorry.
But is just that hte work is sooo good, that you dont want people to make facile connections to starchitects. You need to scream this is me, its my thought, my passion.
Quite frankly I think page 6 needs to go WAYYY smaller. your other work, is so nice this one looks ackward.
Instead of having the "Material Study" I would give my design projects a little more room, having each page speak at a different volume, right now they are all screaming a bit too much.
It's exciting to talk about your work becuase it is good to start with. Hopefully Ill see you in Columbia next fall (if we get in).
melquiades,
don't worry about feeling that you expressed your opinion too strongly. That is what I am essentially asking for: a critical review. I thank you for your opinion and insight as I have found it to be valuable.
In response to your comment about each page speaking at a different volume, I would have to agree that this is something that I need to work on. As it exists now, each page is in a similar format to the previous. It seems as though some sort of visual standard is necessary for the whole to be cohesive, yet I think there is still some room for elasticity.
Thank you all for your comments. It is exciting to be able to get a response on my work when it is still in a state where things can be changed or reconsidered.
gse
Hi- Generally I liked the work, and certainly you have some talent............ but i think what some of the comments especially melquiades were about is that the flashiness and modelling of every project suggest a level of refinement to be read with a starchitect, but given the level of experience you have - it looks too much like emulation. Partly that is to do with a lack of context- but i think that what a lot of the models are trying to show is better explained diagramatically. Show the idea that creates, develops and defines a project, rather than a finished 3d model of every stage. Critically what that means is that i think what is lacking from your portfolio is the explanation and presentaion of ideas. And i think it does no harm to explain each project further through less developed means- ie a diagram- and i dont mean napkin sketches- they can be as refined as your portfolio (perhaps think Lindy Roy link">http://www.roydesign.com/]link[/url]
esp NOAH and issey in interiors- which fits well with your graphical style.
I think that would would give a real depth to the portfolio- whilst on the one hand having some great final finished images but more of an explanation of process. But thats all euro thought- maybe what they are looking for is a little different...
and about text- i agree generally they dont look at it- but if they want to- and they well might- just not all the time- it should be there. So just have it small- I presume these are A1's so 9pt should be fine.
I'm not doing you down if thats how it sounds- what i'm saying is you have got further with your work so we can have a better discussion- and i think there needs to be a difference in the presentation of the stage of a project becuase ultimately they are looking for a progression of work and not just a finished piece.
hope this helps
I agree with what others have said, but just to add another bit, what about showing how adept you are in mediums other than the digital, you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well (esp. organic type schools like UCLA). Perhaps adding sketches you've done in your design developement might over come the ubiquity of the computer renderings while also showing the origins of your design sensibilities.
I agree with what others have said, but just to add another bit, what about showing how adept you are in mediums other than the digital, you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well. Perhaps adding sketches you've done in your design developement might over come the ubiquity of the computer renderings while also showing the origins of your design sensibilities.
oops
"you didn't do anything by hand at U of Illinois? I personally like to see work done by hand, maybe the adjudicators would as well (esp. organic type schools like UCLA)"
Have you been to UCLA in the last decade? This portfolio is set up very well for their interests. Could care less about hand drawings.
And as far as doing things by hand at UIC (not U of I, big difference to those of us who are (were) here, not so big to people on the outside), I an attest to Gelander's prolific hand diagram processes, but I don't think they are the least bit necessary here. If the illustrator version reads more clearly, introducing a squiggly line sketch is counter-productive!
That said, I agree with some of the comments about diagrams. Need some more! I know you have them, man. What about those block-by-block diagrams of UrbHab? Those were hot.
.mm
Sure the above comments may be true, but I think the portfolio looks above and beyond what schools are looking for for MArch I programs. I believe this because at UCLA we are able to llok at the portfolios of the incoming students at any time. They can be pretty bad...
I think you have no need to worry.
TU Delft on the other hand...
'Have you been to UCLA in the last decade? This portfolio is set up very well for their interests. Could care less about hand drawings'
ok. there was a portfolio posted here a while ago from a student from UCLA and it had hand drawings in it so my impression was that they emphasized analog drawing skill as well as digital.
But I'm curious, you didn't do any decent projects in anything other than computer? Did they teach CAD right off the bat?
And surely your design developement process involved more than just diagramming.
I really dig your penumbral contraption on the last page. Could you have an overall concept of the portfolio that ties all the projects together instead of the typical portfolio? But hey, what do I know I am just a 5th-year BArchy.
I agree with domstic, can you draw? Maybe throw in some concept sketches.
Anyways your Max skills are impresive.
"But I'm curious, you didn't do any decent projects in anything other than computer? Did they teach CAD right off the bat?"
They didn't teach CAD at all (beyond L is for line), those of us who learned 3d modelling learned it ourselves within studio projects.
"ok. there was a portfolio posted here a while ago from a student from UCLA and it had hand drawings in it so my impression was that they emphasized analog drawing skill as well as digital."
They emphasize design. Who gives a flying fuck if you do a squiggly line drawing? The end product is most important. Anyone who has done any designing whatsoever and worked in 3d knows and understands the sketchbooks filled with squiggles and thoughts and randomness are a means to an end.
Just like a thesis, a portfolio can either be about the process (and thereby would have to be about the process in each and every project) or about the product. This portfolio, in my mind, is not about process. Nor should it be. To compromise somewhere between process and product is to sell short one or the other.
You need to keep your eye on the ball. The intention of a grad portfolio is not to explain a project or to sell its merits. It's to explain your interests and sell your strengths. It's about what you, the student, want and produces, not what the project looked like 6 weeks before the final. Nobody cares.
.mm
For those inquiring:
yes, in fact, I do have the ability to draw/draft/sketch. That is all that I did for the first two years of my degree. I am self taught (with the help of studio friends) as far as my capabilities on the computer. I did not include hand drawings (most relevant to each project would be a rough process sketch in a notebook with coffee spilled to the side of it) because with the way that I work, each sketch is a small step towards the end result. Some sketch that I had done at the beginning of a project may have little bearing on the end, but it was a trial/error or lead me to another idea, etc.. I included the images I did because these are the ways that I represent my ideas + projects. As Mmatt pointed out: these are my strengths and I am trying my best to push those.
Also, another reason why hand drawn images are not present is because most of the "finished" images from projects that were hand drawn were from my first 3 semesters in school and subsequently, they are some of my first and weakest projects.
I am still curious as to what people think about the bulk content of the portfolio: is it too long? Any thoughts as you looked through it?
Also, is it acceptable to include the project that I did for work? Thoughts on this issue also would be appreciated.
Thank you,
gse
Hi,
I can't do too much critiquing of the portfolio from an architect's perspective, but as a graphic designer, here goes. Also, this isn't meant to be singular to you, as I've noticed similar things in portfolios that people have posted online and also in monographs or magazines.
I just wonder why so many architecture portfolios & books exhibit Horror Vacui. Maybe it's because people cut their teeth on Bruce Mau/Koolhaas books or something?
Every bit of every page is full, full, full of information & illustrations. This tendency could be assuaged by making the portfolio either longer (not in terms of actual content, but in number of pages, so that you can space information out more - so it may get "longer," but will actually be easier to comprehend) or by editing the presented information to be more efficient (editing out projects at your discrection, or showing less information per project).
You have obviously put a lot of care into making the information you've put on each page make sense with each other, but when you look at these pages as wholes - it's a lot of information shocking the eye all at once. Lots of detailed renderings, lots of detailed photos. Nowhere do you ever get a chance to let things 'breathe.'
The breathing room should especially extend to the typography, too. Take slide 18, "Penumbra." The look of this page could be totally improved just by adjusting the type. Leave more of a blank margin around the text. Increase the leading of the type (the space between each line - if you're using 10pt font, try using 13-14pt. leading). And, in this particular instance, I don't believe you need *all* those photos since it doesn't look terribly different from each angle. Maybe one full shot, and one detail. Think about how you see projects presented in design magazines - you don't get a full 360, x-y-x-axis, rendering of every projects, just a few 'glamour shots' of the most significant points of note.
Unless it is a very specific design intention to give the presentation of your work a cramped or "full" feeling to it (i.e. if you were showing a project on urban density or something, and wanted to impart the feeling of crowding to your design), if at all possible you may consider leaving some space around stuff in the future. It doesn't seem like this is intentional in your work, though -more likely you wanted to just show the maximum information in the minimum number of pages, which is not always successful in getting people to understand the gestalt of your work right away.
That said, it *is* obviously careful and well-considered. And - honestly - you've done this much work and other architecture applicants have praised it, so I personally would send the thing on in!
geland if you end up changing anything do post it it would be interesting to see the evolution.
Your portfolio is really strong. I am in the process of putting one together myself and looking at yours makes it hurt just a little. I do, however, agree with Susan Surface a little bit. I looked through your spreads very quickly, didn't read a thing, and didnt attempt to understand the projects at all. Similiar, perhaps, to how admissions faculty may flip through with 500 more sitting in the pile in front of them. Im sure the projects are strong but the one thing I noticed is that all of the pages begin to look the same. Hot digital graphics all with a similiar frequency page after page. It seems like a lot of the comments you have heard already; white space, show diagrams, breathing room could be valuable. Those digital renderings may be a lot more powerful if they are given a chance to stand out more. Just a thought...
I think this port brings up an interesting point of
intuitive process vs generative process...and I think certain schools will be looking for sketches and diagrams while other will focus on other issues.
Lots of good things already said, and I agree it is good already. Always room for critisism and I think it is great you ask for it.
Susan is absolutely correct about the layout. Less is more, agree about the multiple shots that are so similar. I actually like page 6 because it has only one image, and a very strong interesting one at that. I can actually imagine occupying that, the other images I can't. It stands out in your portfolio, while the rest fades and mushes together, if I must critisize. I also agree with the comments about lots of fancy imagery, and wanting a break from that, show me something messy, not just more of the same refined stuff. Consider shortening it?
While I think we are all giving legit crits, I wouldn't fuss over it and try to change it a whole bunch, maybe the paring down is most important and easiest thing you can do.
I guess another way to say it is: leave something to intrigue the viewer, Kinda like how a woman is sexier with lingerie that buck nekked. don't put it all out there and throw it in the the viewer's face for THEM to decide what they want to view on each page they will lose interest and attention will stray - obviously they aren't going to be able to study it to the degree you'd like them too, select your images very carefully.
please post if you update.
nice work on the whole...
you guys have been awesome with the comments given to geland.
i`m in the process of making mine. now, i know what to do and what not to.
I'm also in the process of making mine, which I am now not as confident about.
I have one suggestion for you even though I think that its already great. I've had professors tell me that you need to have a evident design strategy but also be able to stop the reviewer. Its seem to me that it would be easy to become lost in your layout or to easy to just flip through, maybe I'm wrong but thats kinda what I did. It might be that each page contains alot of similar tones which sort of becomes repeditive. There might be a way for you highlight your favorite works which would cause the reviewer to pause and flip a little slower.
And agian I want to say that am impressed and wished my was at that level.
'They emphasize design. Who gives a flying fuck if you do a squiggly line drawing? The end product is most important. Anyone who has done any designing whatsoever and worked in 3d knows and understands the sketchbooks filled with squiggles and thoughts and randomness are a means to an end.'
Semantics my friend. a computer rendering presenting a design and watercolor painting presenting a design presents two different design sensibilities. The end product and the representation of the end product are one in the same - they present the design temperment of the student and depending on the school is also a reflection of the design temperment of the school i.e. Columbia U. you can tell a Columbia student miles away by the renderings. The same for the portfolio, a process portfolio and a product portfolio present two different modes of thought, different sensibilites, and different personalities, equally valid but for different reasons, and thus certain sensibilities appeal to different schools for different reasons. I was wrong about UCLA, i was thinking of UC Berk, a different school, with different sensibility. So i say that yes, some people do care what the project looked like 6 weeks before it was completed because it shows them in a blink of the eye what context you put yourself in, the cache of meanings you surround around yourself with, do you value being an artist or an engineer, or is it somewhere inbetween, or is it something different all together.
I personally like to see the evolution of ideas. The basis for your design is as important as the end product. I do like your portfolio however there are somethings that could be improved.
First thing that bothered me was the color. Everything is grey. Everything looks like they are intended to be made of plastic and manufactured in China. I know its hard to incorporate color into the page but as you scan all the sheets there is just so much grey. I noticed this is a trend. At the Harvard GSD there is tons of this going around. MIT is the same. I am rather unimpressed by the graphics used by many students. I do like your ideas and concepts. I even like the exploded axonmetric. There is no doubt you will get into a grad school. You have the necessary tools needed to suceed. However please find a flavor of your own. I have been working in architecture for over 7 years. The people who turn out to be the best problem solvers are rarely following the pack.
Keep up the good work and try to find your flavor in grad school. Once you are in the industry its a rare but sweet treat to find a firm with similar taste.
Geland your portoflio is good, this thread has turned to something else so my comments are not directly about you or your work.
I am really bothered by the lack of process both in Art and Architecture. If you don't create your own set of rules, and experiment, you are basicaly copying others or materializing facile ideas. In art you see it all the time, one liners all over the place without context or challenge.
I think the jeff koons effect is creeping into architecture, make shocking glossy/images and $ell $ell $ell. Will we see the Ciocciolina "money shot" building?
But I disagree that Columbia or any Unversity is teaching without process, the process in Columbia is digital, but is still process. They are experimenting and coming out with new ways of thinking of space, it takes out he had-made but it still is process. So don't make a blanket statement about Columbia, they are teaching new methods and techniques, some students use them for good, some just copy to stay afloat. I have looked at their work and I find it refreshing.
Geland your work shows thoughtfulness and process, you dont show it. I would love to see the processes that allowed you to arrive to the beautiful spaces in the Chicago building. It is by far the best, and looks like you made many decisions in a very precise manner. How did you make those decisions? You dont have to put a bunch of sketches for the hell ofit, but one or two that explain the spatial concept would be wonderful.
I agree with +q and disagree with domestic. Process adds depth to a any project; the lack of it can begin to insinuate superficiality.
I rely heavily on the computer. But, I never forget the power of basic rudimentary sketch work in model or drawing form.
also, remember this is a grad school portfolio not a professional portfolio and the people looking at it probably want to get some idea of what the student is thinking when designing. gehry uses models tocreate form, rem uses program, holl does the intuition/haptic thing. but you might not get that from the finished buildings. same with your work (which is pretty good). so yeah, put the process in if you can work it somehow. it will make the portfolio better.
Susan Surface:
"I can't do too much critiquing of the portfolio from an architect's perspective, but as a graphic designer, here goes."
I usually find the opinions of non-architects to be the most interesting. If I ask someone that isn't in the field a question, I usually get a similar reply and have not ever understood why. In my opinion, if you are an intelligent and detail-oriented individual, such as yourself, your opinion is still highly valued. I really took the third and fifth paragraphs that you stated into high consideration. Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed response.
Chairman Mao:
Your emphasis on more process was also very helpful and I enjoyed the link that you attached, particularily the documentation of the Issey Miyake project. I can begin to understand why some have interpreted my work as emulation. Although, it is not simply a "I like asymptote, so I think that I will do an asymptote-ish project this semester". I have taken the opportunity to explore different ideas with each project in my undergraduate years @ UIC and I don't think that it is a bad thing at all. I look to the coming years as an opportunity to focus my work.
All: I will be refining the portfolio in the coming week or so and will post an update in this discussion. I hope that I can incorporate as many points and suggestions into it that I have recieved. You all have been very helpful.
thank you,
geland
Hey Geland!
I know this is such a throwback 2000s, but the link with the portfolio is not available anymore. While the comments and critique intrigued me, I would surely like to see the portfolio itself so I know what people were talking about ...and maybe have a look at an updated version.
Many thanks!
Is that a serious question?
No worries, I found it:
Exactly what I was looking for. But I'm missing pages 19 and 581. I see you guys still keep track of the archives. Can you send those two in a sealed letter? You never know with these horse-mailmen...
where are you now?
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.