I'm doing 8... it looks fine.

follow the 18 9 6 rule

18 for headings
9 for body text
6 for captions

might be a little TMI: http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=57617_0_42_0_C

leave text out.

Thanks for the suggestions.

That linked thread is pretty helpful, but it's more related to types of font and related rules of thumb. I ended up choosing Gills Sans after reading through that awhile ago.

ask rationalist - she's the pro, no seriously.

I am anal retentive and do nearly all my text at 10.5 but then I only use arial because microsoft/apple have managed to kill the beauty that is helvitica

how have microsoft and apple killed helvetica? i've not typography expert, but i've always heard helvetica is great and that arial is a poor rip-off of helvetica and thus to never ever use arial.

Use what works best for your portfolio.

I'm sure you're not into architecture to follow some 18-9-6 rule, even if it is well-meaning and coherent (if unreadable to anybody over 50).

As long as you're organized with your font choices, nobody who likes the content of your portfolio is going to reject you because you used something 2pt larger than what everybody else is doing.

I like to write "GENIUS" in 72pt. on the cover.

One thing to remember is that many of your portolio's reviewers are a decade or two (or three) older than you. The peepers start to go at around age forty, and font too tiny to easily read may well go unread.

people don't start reading the big-print books til they're in their 60s... so 9pt is fine. Especially with Gill Sans, it has a large x-height.

No architect is going to specifically dock you for having too big of type, but they will certainly notice that your portfolio looks clumsy and childlike, which was big type does to things.

on a side note, an interesting critique on Gill Sans.

wow, r, that article is nerdier than just about any architectural discussion i've ever hear/read. ; )

rationalist-

What type of font do you prefer/use?

My only concern is 8.5" x 8.5" does not fit within the confines of the golden ratio.

unfortunately, these days I'm using some pretty spendy type... a lot of Gotham, Interstate, Meta, some Glypha, Rockwell, Frutiger, and Universe. My new favorite is Vialog, but that's for large-scale applications, not print. DIN numerals are nice, but the spacing is crap.

On the other hand, Gill still makes the 21 most used fonts (by designers). So maybe I'm just being a snob.

and yeah Steven... you should hear people who design type. Tiny connections between the parts of letters are discussed with as much fervor as you guys discuss whole staircases. Type-nerd alert!

Chili-

I chose 8.5" x 8.5" because my work responds well to a square layout.

What would you suggest?

Sorry, it appears my sarcasm was lost in translation... though 8.5" x 13.75" is well within the confines of the golden ratio.

Ha. No worries. Thanks for clarifying.